SC: Under Order XXI Rule 102 CPC, A Transferee Pendente Lite Cannot Obstruct Execution of a Decree  ||  SC: RTE Act promotes fraternity and equality by children of judges and vendors studying together  ||  MP High Court: Aadhaar and Voter ID Cards are Not Definitive Proof of Date of Birth  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Second Marriage During Subsisting First Marriage Void Unless Custom Permits It  ||  Allahabad HC: Will in Favor of Someone Does Not Affect Compassionate Appointment Based on Dependency  ||  MP High Court: Mere Illness of a Family Member, If Improving, is Not Sufficient for Interim Bail  ||  Bombay HC: ?25K Fine for Flying Kites With Nylon Manjha; Parents Must Ensure Responsible Conduct  ||  Delhi High Court: Home State Must be the First Preference For Claiming Insider IFS Cadre Allocation  ||  SC: Hindu Daughter-In-Law Widowed After Her Father-In-Law’s Death is Entitled to Maintenance  ||  SC: Vendor Remains a Necessary Party in Specific Performance Suits Even After Transferring Property    

Consumer Forum, Hyderabad: Supermarket Charging Cost for Carry Bags an 'Unfair Trade Practice' - (22 Feb 2021)

CONSUMER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad has directed 'More Megastore' to discontinue its unfair trade practice of arbitrarily imposing additional cost of carry bags (bearing its logo) on the consumer at the time of making payment. The Commission has held that using the Consumer as an advertisement agent at his cost tantamount to unfair trade practice under Section 2(1)(r) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Tags : DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION   CARRY BAGS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved