At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. KAPOOR
By, PRESIDING MEMBER & MR. B.K. TAIMNI
For the Petitioner: NEMO For the Respondents: -----
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 Commiss
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ion does not call for any interference. Revision petition is dismissed accordingly.