Charged Rs 175 ‘extra’ for wine bottle, Himachal man wins Rs 20,000 payout

According to the complainant, he had purchased a bottle of Sula Vineyards Sauvignon Blanc from the shop. Although the bottle carried a printed Rs 925 MRP, the shop allegedly charged him Rs 1,100 through UPI, resulting in an excess charge of Rs 175. He also alleged that the retailer did not issue a proper tax invoice or cash memo. Claiming that the acts amounted to unfair trade practices, he sought refund of the excess amount, compensation and litigation costs.

The opposite party failed to appear before the commission despite notice, therefore, the commission passed the order ex parte.

‘Deceptive and exploitative conduct’

After examining the complainant’s ‘unrebutted evidence’, the commission held that it stood conclusively established that the retailer had overcharged the consumer by Rs 175 and failed to issue a statutory bill or tax invoice.

“From a bare perusal of the evidence and documents produced by the complainant, it stands conclusively established that the Opposite Party recovery-charged an excess amount of INR 175 over and above the printed Maximum Retail Price (M.R.P.) of INR 925, which amounts to an arbitrary markup of nearly 19%. It is also established that the Opposite Party failed to issue any valid, statutory bill or tax invoice for the said commercial transaction, it said.

The Commission observed that selling a packaged commodity above its printed MRP is a clear violation of Rule 18(2) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011. It further held that the failure to issue a proper invoice also raised concerns of violation of the GST law and potential tax evasion, amounting to an unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

“The deceptive and exploitative market conduct of the Opposite Party has undoubtedly caused financial loss, unnecessary harassment, and mental distress to the Complainant. Therefore, the complaint deserves to be allowed,” the commission held.

Accordingly, the commission directed the shop to refund the excess amount of Rs 175, pay Rs 10,000 as compensation, and Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs. It also ordered that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Excise and Taxation Department, Himachal Pradesh, to initiate appropriate action against the retailer in accordance with law.

Takeaway

The ruling underscores that no retailer or shopkeeper can charge over and above MRP and doing so may invite penal consequences and order of costs.

Aggrieved consumers may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Himachal Pradesh helpline: 1800–180–8087) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.