The South Delhi District Consumer Commission has ordered Bata India to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation and litigation costs to a customer who was charged Rs 6 for a paper carry bag without prior notice.

Dealing with the complaint of a woman regarding the extra charge for a carry bag during the purchase, president Monika A Srivastava and member Kiran Kausha held that while retailers may charge for plain carry bags, customers must be informed through prominent notices before purchase, as directed by the National Consumer Commission.

“The said fact is substantiated by the photographs annexed with the complaint. It is evident from the photographs that ‘an extra amount for a carry bag would be charged, or consumers are expected to carry their own cloth/jute bags’ is not displayed at the store in question,” the commission said on May 26.

It was stated that the complainant felt that she was wrongly charged for the paper carry bag, and the opposite party was indulging in unfair trade practice by doing so. It is stated that the stores/shops cannot charge consumers any additional rate for the bag if the product is purchased from the same store.

She further claimed that of late consumers were charged for carry bags, which range from Rs 3 to Rs 15 and even higher in some cases. This practice is relatively new, as until a few years ago, many brands accounted for the cost of the carry bag as overhead expenses and provided them free of cost.

It was further stated that post 2011, the Ministry of Forests and Environment issued the Plastic Waste (Management And Handling) Rules, which state that ‘No (plastic) carry bags shall be made available free of cost by retailers to consumers’. The real intention behind this move was to discourage the consumer from using plastic bags, as plastic is non-biodegradable, hence a threat to the environment.

It was further claimed that making the carry bag available to the buyers has now become a commercial exercise. Retailers such as Bata began switching to more expensive paper and cloth carry bags with a view to increasing their profits by charging the same exorbitant price at the expense of unsuspecting consumers.

They validate their carry bag charging policy by differentiating between paper or jute and polythene carry bags, and also misrepresenting the size of the carry bags.

It was stated that Bata tried to justify its act of charging for plain carry bags by claiming that it is covered under ‘goods’. If the paper carry bag is a ‘good’ sold by the opposite party at a fixed price, then they must explain why it is not displayed among the items for sale on its website or in its retail stores.

The company resisted the complaint, stating the paper carry bag purchased by the complainant clearly indicates that all relevant requirements and specifications are well met, along with the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) displayed on the carry bag.

They further argued that only after obtaining the oral consent of the complainant, the paper carry bag was sold to the complainant, and charges for the same were added to the invoice.

It was stated that a plain paper carry bag containing all the mandatory declarations as per legal metrology ‘Packaged Commodities’ Rules 2011 was provided to the complainant to take away the purchased product. The paper carry bag provided to the complainant did not contain any advertisement/branding publication and was a black/plain carry bag with an MRP sticker.

Highlighting that the complainant suppressed relevant information, the brand submitted that a complaint on similar facts was filed by the daughter of the complainant on the same grounds in DCDRC-1 (North District), and while passing the said judgment, the commission was pleased to observe that “once the price is printed on the paper bag, it becomes an independent item to be sold at the store”.