Sarvajeet Singh vs BATRA HOTEL, RAWATSAR

HEARD. This is complainant''s appeal against the order dated 21.12.2000 whereby the D.F., Hanumangarh dismissed his Complaint No. 185/20000. The grievance of the appellant in his complaint was that the respondent, who runs his hotel in the business name of "Batra Hotel" at bus stand, Rawatsar charged Rs. 5/- over and above the price of each of the 3 bottles of soft drink, which he had purchased from the respondent on 8.7.2000. The explanation of the respondent was that although he should have sold the 3 bottles of soft drink for Rs. 40/- each but he had charged a sum of Rs. 5/- in excess of the price of each bottle on the ground that such drinks are supplied to the customers and the service charges are realised from the customers. It was also pleaded that in order to supply cold drink as per requirement of the customers, the drink has to be kept cold and, therefore, extra amount of Rs. 5/- for each bottle was charged from them. The D.F. held that charging the extra price for the above reason did not constitute "restrictive trade practice" on the part of the respondent.

THE contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that neither in the bill issued by the respondent nor in any notice exhibited in his hotel it was communicated to the customers of the cold drinks that they shall be charged Rs. 5/- extra per bottle as service charges. Thus without there being any condition between the parties for paying and charging Rs. 5/- per bottle over and above the actual price and at the same time not issuing any receipt for so charging the price from them amounted to "restrictive trade practice". The learned Counsel for the respondent could not dispute the facts of the case as stated above but contended that since the drinks in the bottle has to be kept cold by the respondent, a charge of Rs. 5/- per bottle was justified and the same did not amount to restrictive trade practice on the part of the respondent.

The term restrictive trade practice has been defined in Section 2(1)(nnn) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as under: "(nnn) "restrictive trade practice" means a trade practice which tends to bring about manipulation of price or its conditions of delivery or to affect flow of supplies in the market relating to goods or services in such a manner as to impose on the consumers unjustified costs or restrictions and shall include- (a) delay beyond the period agreed to by a trader in supply of such goods or in providing the services which has led or is likely to lead to rise in the price; (b) any trade practice which requires a consumer to buy, hire or avail of any goods or, as the case may be, services as condition precedent to buying, hiring or availing of other goods or services."

IT may be noted that a trade practice adopted by a trader would amount to restrictive trade practice if such practice tends to bring about manipulation of price or its conditions of delivery or to affect flow of supply in the market relating to goods or services in such a manner as to impose on the consumers unjustified costs or restrictions. In the instant case the respondent supplies cold drinks to the customers in his hotel at a price over and above the prescribed price thereof and thus his practice obviously amounts to restrictive trade practice. Adoption of such practice which leads to levy of unjustified cost on the goods sold to the customer with a view to get oneself unjustly enriched amounts to "unfair trade practice" besides being restrictive trade practice. IT is not disputed that the respondent did not make the cold drinks available to the customers at the prescribed price. The customers have, therefore, to buy the cold drinks at enhanced rates. Moreover, the respondent does not mention the amount, which has been charged by him over and above the prescribed price, in the cash memo/bill issued by him to the customer. In view of the above the impugned order is set aside and the appeal allowed. The respondent is directed to refund an amount of Rs. 15/-, which he charged from the appellant over and above the prescribed price of the 3 bottles of cold drinks and further pay an amount of Rs. 500/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 500/- as cost of litigation within a period of 3 months positively. The appeal stands allowed in the above manner. Appeal allowed.