Retailers are obligated to sell products at the printed MRP if the stock was procured prior to a government-mandated price revision notification; charging above MRP for such old stock constitutes an unfair trade practice.

ORDER: (HON’BLE SMT. R.S. RAJESHREE, MEMBER, NON-JUDICIAL)

01. This appeal is filed U/s.41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, by appellants/opposite parties praying this Commission to set aside the order of the District Commission Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Hyderabad in CC No.576 of 2021 dated 12.08.2022 and consequently, dismiss the complaint with costs in the interest of justice.

02. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as complainant and opposite party as arrayed in the complaint.

03. The case of the complainant is that he had purchased White & Blue Classic Whisky from Opposite party No.1 on 28.09.2021 vide invoice No.H00109/17/71693, wherein the opposite party had charged him Rs.1,060/- whereas the MRP mentioned on the bottle was Rs.770/- inclusive of all taxes, that the opposite party had charged Rs.290/- in excess to the MRP printed. When the complainant questioned the same the opposite party had stated that the rates have been increased but the same is not printed on the bottle. That this act of charging more than the MRP rate amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. As such complaint was filed before the District Commission seeking excess amount collected apart from compensation and costs.

04. The opposite parties filed their written version while admitting that the complainant had purchased White & Blue Classic Whisky from them but however opposed the complainant on the ground that the complaint is filed based on surmises and conjectures, that liquor is a commodity sold in the market only by licensed entities, who are bound to follow rule strictly. The Telangana State Beverage Corporation Limited, through the Government of Telangana regulates the functioning of the entities and the opposite parties are bound to follow the directions given by the Corporation. That the complainant being a Marketing Manager must be aware of the price fixation policies that in liquor segment rest with the Government and there is no control or discretion of the retailer to increase the price of any product of liquor.

05. That as per notification dated 16.12.2019. Issued by Telangana State Beverages Corporation Limited, the rates of liquor were revised by Excise Duty as such the complainant was charged based upon the revised rates. The Corporation had clearly directed that “The Stocks purchased on and after 16.12.2019 be sold at revised MRP rates. Any violation will be viewed very seriously.” Abiding the said notification, the opposite parties have sold the Whisky at the revised rate. Hence, they have neither adopted any unfair trade practice or have been deficient in their services.

06. Before the District Commission the Complainant filed his evidence affidavit and got marked Exs.A1 and A2. One, Mohammed Mahboob, filed his evidence affidavit as RW1 and got marked Ex. B1 to B3.

07. The District Commission allowed the complaint as under:

“The Complaint is allowed in part and the Opposite parties are directed:

I. To pay the extra amount of Rs.290/-(Rupees Two Hundred and Ninety only) charged over and above the MRP, along with interest 24% p.a., from the date of 28.09.2021 till the date of realization;

II. To pay an amount of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards compensation.

III. To pay an amount of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) towards costs of litigation.

This order be complied with by the opposite parties, within 45 days from the date of receipt of the Order, failing which the amounts mentioned in S.No.(i) above sh