|
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION |
|
|
|
|
|
REVISION PETITION NO.
2132 OF 2007 |
|
|
(Against
the order dated |
in Appeal/ Complaint No. 1773/2006 |
|
of
the State Commission |
|
|
M/S CARGO TARPAULIN INDUSTRIES |
........
Petitioner(s) |
|
Vs. |
|
|
SRI MALLIKARJUN
B. KORI |
........
Respondent(s) |
|
BEFORE: |
|
|
HON'BLE
MR. JUSTICE S.N. KAPOOR, PRESIDING MEMBER |
|
|
MR.
B.K. TAIMNI, MEMBER |
|
|
For the Petitioner
:
NEMO |
|
|
|
|
|
Dated the 5th Day of
July, 2007 |
|
|
ORDER |
|
The case was called out
earlier and passed over. Again even on second call, none is present on behalf
of the petitioner.
We have gong through the
impugned order. It is apparent that the petitioner has charged Rs.112/- for
Duck Back Baby Sheet sold to the complainant. Its Maximum Retail Price was
Rs.90/-. According to the petitioner that though M.R.P was Rs.124/- but the
Duck Back Baby Sheet was having an old label of Rs.92/- and after discussions,
the price was settled at Rs.112/-. If there was an old label on the Duck Back
Baby Sheet, indicating M.R.P. of Rs.92/- its M.R.P. would not increase, if
subsequently due to increased cost of production, transportation etc. M.R.P. of
subsequently manufactured goods is increased. If in these circumstances, the
State Commission has imposed exemplary compensation of Rs.10,000/-,
we think that the order passed by the State Commission does not call for any
interference.
Revision petition is
dismissed accordingly.
.
..J
(S.N.
KAPOOR)
PRESIDING
MEMBER
.
..
(B.K.
TAIMNI)
SS/10