National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): While dismissing the revision petition filed by Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. challenging the orders of District Forum and State Commission, which were passed in favour of the complainant, NCDRC imposed punitive costs in the sum of Rs one lakh on Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. for charging more amount than the maximum retail price (MRP) from the consumer. Earlier, the complainant was informed by the official of the Company that she should purchase their products and free pair of silver watch would be given as per terms and conditions of that scheme. She booked a fridge and a washing machine by paying Rs 500 in advance and when the firm delivered the goods she paid the remaining balance of Rs 22,341. However, it was later found that the firm was charging more amount than the MRP of the goods. The excess amount was Rs 2,695 for each of the articles. Even after approaching Company regarding the grievance, no relief was rendered. Feeling aggrieved the complainant filed complaint before District Forum which decided in favour of the complainant and directed the Company to refund the excess amount in the sum of Rs.5,390/- and pay compensation in the sum of Rs.18,722/- to the complainant. An appeal filed by the Company in the matter before State Commission was also dismissed. Before NCDRC, the Company contended that the case was barred by limitation as it was filed after a delay of two years. While rejecting the said contention of the Company, the Commission observed, “The flip-flop stance on the part of the OP (Company) clearly goes to show that they were delaying the case and had adopted a Fabian policy. They never said ‘no’ to the claim made by the complainant.” After perusing the material on record, NCDRC noted, “There is no flaw at all in the order passed by the Fora below. On the contrary, the position of the company must be noticed. It has committed an egregious mistake and tried to sell the goods at more than M.R.P. The free gift of pair of silver watch is nothing, but a ruse to lead the gullible consumers, up the garden path.” While imposing the costs upon the Company, NCDRC dismissed the petition. Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Anagha Vilas Kulkarni, , decided on August 21, 2015

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

One comment

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.