Consumer Forum Penalizes Karnataka Restaurant For Selling Water, Beverages Above MRP

The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules prohibit the sale of packed commodities above the retail price

By: :  Ajay Singh
By :  Legal Era
Update: 2023-10-09 03:30 GMT
trueasdfstory

Consumer Forum Penalizes Karnataka Restaurant For Selling Water, Beverages Above MRP The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules prohibit the sale of packed commodities above the retail price A consumer disputes redressal commission in Tumakuru, Karnataka has slapped a restaurant with a fine of Rs.7,000 for charging above the maximum retail price (MRP) in addition to Goods...


Consumer Forum Penalizes Karnataka Restaurant For Selling Water, Beverages Above MRP

The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules prohibit the sale of packed commodities above the retail price

A consumer disputes redressal commission in Tumakuru, Karnataka has slapped a restaurant with a fine of Rs.7,000 for charging above the maximum retail price (MRP) in addition to Goods and Services Tax (GST) on beverages.

In the Nandeesh vs Vaishali Deluxe Comforts case, a Coram of GT Vijayalakshmi (President), Kumara N (Member), and Nivedita Ravish (Member) noted that as per the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, the sale of packed commodities at a price above the retail price is prohibited.

The Commission observed that the rules did not exclude restaurants. It held, “There cannot be two MRPs except in accordance with the law, and a service provider cannot charge an amount more than the MRP.”

The Commission was hearing a customer’s complaint alleging that for a water bottle and a bottle of Sprite (each priced at Rs.20), he was charged an amount exceeding the MRP in addition to a 5 percent GST. This resulted in a total price of Rs.24.14 per bottle.

Taking note of the Commodities Rules, the Commission stated that the rules applied even to restaurants. Therefore, charging above the printed amount meant the restaurant was dealing with unfair trade practices.

The consumer forum held that despite receiving notices from a lawyer and the Commission, the restaurant did not defend its case by appearing in court.

Moreover, due to the restaurant’s act, the complainant had to suffer agony by approaching the Commission. Therefore, the restaurant was liable to pay the complainant Rs.3,000 as litigation expenses and Rs.4,000 for suffering mental agony.

Tags:    

By: - Ajay Singh

By - Legal Era

Similar News