Consumer Law Update: Retailer Liable for Non-Transparent Pricing of Carry Bags

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Lucknow (“Commission”) in Shashi Kant Shukla vs Vishal Mega Mart has held retail chain Vishal Mega Mart (“Respondent”) guilty of engaging in unfair trade practices and providing deficient services by charging a consumer INR 18 for a carry bag without obtaining prior consent.

Background of the Case:

Shashi Kant Shukla (“Complainant”) visited Vishal Mega Mart, where he purchased a shirt priced at INR 599. During the billing process, he was charged an additional INR 18 for a carry bag. The Complainant objected, stating that he neither needed nor was informed about the additional charge for the bag. Despite raising this objection at the billing counter, the Respondent insisted that he pay the amount.

Following this, the Complainant issued a legal notice to Vishal Mega Mart, which remained unresponsive. Consequently, the Complainant approached the Commission alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Issues Before the Commission:

Whether charging a consumer for a carry bag without prior intimation or consent amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Judgment:

The Commission noted that “retail entities are expected to provide essential packaging like carry bags as a basic service, free of cost, unless the customer has explicitly opted out.”

The Commission also referred to a similar decision made earlier by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in the case of Big Bazaar (Future Retail Ltd.) vs. Sahil Dawar in 2020.

Further, as per the Section 2(47) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, unfair trade practice means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice

In view of above, the Commission held that charging for a carry bag without disclosing this charge upfront and without offering the consumer a choice amounts to an unfair trade practice. The Commission further observed that such a bag, bearing the store's logo, also serves as promotional material and hence, the consumer cannot be compelled to pay for it.

Accordingly, the Commission ruled in favor of Complainant and the Respondent was ordered to:

• Refund INR 18 to Mr. Shukla within 45 days of the order;
• Pay 9% interest per annum on the Rs. 18 from the day it was charged until the day it is refunded;
• Pay INR 25,000 as compensation for the mental and physical harassment faced by Mr. Shukla;
• Pay INR 10,000 as litigation expenses.

The Commission further warned that “failure to comply with the compensation and litigation cost directive would attract 12% interest per annum on the due amount.”

Source:

Shashi Kant Shukla vs Vishal Mega Mart Complaint Case No. CC/4/2023, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Lucknow.