The consumer court emphasised that the customer has the right to be informed, prior to making a purchase, about any additional charges he had to pay for the carry bag.
A District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Delhi recently directed the fashion brand, Lifestyle to pay a compensation of 3,000 for charging a customer Rs.7 for a paper carry bag at one of its outlets [Anmol Malhotra v Lifestyle International Pvt. Limited @ Max Fashion].
The coram comprising President SS Malhotra and members Rashmi Bansal and Ravi Kumar held the outlet liable for causing mental agony to the customer and also directed them to return rs.7 charged for the carry bag.
“The commission is of the opinion that OP (Lifestyle) cannot charge any amount for carry bags, particularly those items which have been purchased from the OP outlet itself and charging any amount from the consumers for that amounts to a deficiency of service on the part of the OP. Therefore, OP is directed to refund Rs.7/- as cost of the carry bag to the complainant and Rs.3000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment which shall include litigation cost,” the November 28 order said.
The commission added that if this order is not complied with on time, Lifestyle would have to pay interest at a rate of 9% per year.
The consumer disputes redressal forum was dealing with a complaint by one, Anmol Malhotra who claimed that he was charged rs.7 for a paper carry bag without his knowledge when he visited an outlet owned by Lifestyle.
The incident is said to have taken place on December 8, 2020, after Malhotra purchased items from the outlet worth Rs.706, which included a charge of ₹7 for the paper carry bag.
Malhotra contended that the fashion brand imposed this additional cost without prior notice, causing him distress and inconvenience.
He asserted that this amounted to a deficiency of service and was an unfair trade practice.
The consumer commission noted that the outlet appeared to have charged the fee for the paper carry bag since paper carry bags were more expensive than plastic bags, which were now banned by the government.
The primary issue before the commission was whether it was permissible to levy an extra charge on customers for providing carry bags without providing prior notice to customers.
The consumer court observed that the customer has a right to be informed, of such additional charges prior to making a purchase.
The customer also has the right to know essential details such as specifications and the price of the carry bag, the consumer court added..
“The carry bag of undisclosed specifications were forced on the consumers at the price fixed by the OP (Lifestyle). Such information at the time of making payment causes harassment to the customer and burden him with additional cost and also affects his rights to make an informed decision to opt for a specific outlet or not,” the DCDRC held.
Reference was also made to similar observations in a 2020 order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in a case involving Big Bazaar.
Therefore, the district consumer court concluded that Lifestyle cannot impose additional charges for carry bags, especially without informing the customer and ordered Lifestyle to compensate its customer (Malhotra) for doing so.
(Courtesy by; Bar and Bench)
+ There are no comments
Add yours