Overcharged Rs 67 on shoe MRP, Bata ordered to refund student, pay Rs 2,000 compensation. Here's what happened

A consumer dispute over an additional Rs 67 charged on a pair of shoes has resulted in a significant ruling against Bata India. The Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has upheld a district commission's finding that the footwear retailer was wrong in charging more than the printed Maximum Retail Price (MRP) without following the required legal procedure, reports The Times of India. The case happened after a law student in Ernakulam was charged Rs 1,066 for shoes carrying a printed MRP of Rs 999.

ALSO READ: Harsh Goenka's viral 3–30–300 rule is a powerful reminder about choosing friends wisely

How did the dispute begin?

The complainant, a student at Government Law College, Ernakulam, purchased a pair of shoes from Bata's Broadway showroom in Ernakulam on March 16, 2022. According to the complaint, the shoes carried a printed MRP of Rs 999. However, the store billed him Rs 1,066, which was Rs 67 more than the displayed price.

When the customer questioned the additional charge, he was allegedly informed by the store manager that "the government had allowed the collection of sales tax above the MRP for items sold after 01.01.2022", the TOI report stated.

ALSO READ: FIFA World Cup 2026 Today Match Schedule (2 July)

But the student was not convinced by the explanation, hence decided to approach the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Ernakulam, claiming that the retailer had engaged in deficiency in service and unfair trade practices.

District Commission rules in customer's favour

After reviewing the evidence submitted by the complainant, the district commission partly allowed the complaint.

It directed Bata to:

• Refund the excess Rs 67 charged to the customer
• Pay Rs 10,000 as compensation
• Pay Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs

Bata later challenged this order before the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

Bata's argument before the State Commission

During the appeal, Bata argued that it was legally entitled to collect an amount higher than the printed MRP under Rule 18(3) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.

The company contended that the rule permits sellers to revise prices and collect a higher amount when tax rates increase after products have already been packaged.

What the Kerala State Commission Said

The state commission examined the provisions of Rule 18(3) and clarified that a seller cannot simply charge a higher amount without complying with specific requirements laid down under the law.

The commission observed: "There must be a marking/sticker on the goods indicating that the goods were pre-packed in the month in which the tax had been revised, or fresh tax had been imposed."

The commission further noted: "As per the said rule, if any excess tax is to be collected over and above the MRP due to the increase in the tax by the state government or the central government, the said aspect has to be published in two newspapers. The second proviso to Rule 18(3) mandates that the earlier as well as the new rate should be shown in the shoes."

No sticker, no revised price display

After reviewing the evidence, the commission found that no sticker showing a revised price had been placed on the shoes purchased by the customer.

The customer had consistently maintained that the footwear only displayed the original MRP of Rs 999. The commission also noted that Bata failed to provide evidence proving that a revised price sticker had been affixed to the product.

Since there was no updated MRP displayed on the shoes, the commission held that Bata was required to show the revised price through the prescribed method before charging a higher amount.

The absence of such disclosure meant that the retailer could not legally recover an additional amount from the customer.

Commission finds deficiency in service and unfair trade practice

Based on its findings, the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission concluded that Bata had failed to comply with the legal requirements for charging a price higher than the printed MRP.

As a result, the commission held the company guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The commission agreed with the district commission's direction requiring Bata to refund the extra Rs 67 collected from the customer.

Compensation reduced by State Commission

While upholding the refund order, the state commission felt that the compensation and litigation costs awarded by the district commission were excessive.

Accordingly, it reduced:

Compensation from Rs 10,000 to Rs 2,000
Litigation costs from Rs 5,000 to Rs 1,000

Apart from these modifications, the commission upheld the findings against Bata.

FAQs
Why was Bata ordered to refund Rs 67?

The customer purchased shoes with a printed MRP of Rs 999 but was charged Rs 1,066. The commission found that Bata had not followed the legal procedure required to charge more than the printed MRP.

Can retailers charge more than the printed MRP?

Only in limited circumstances permitted under law, such as certain tax revisions, and only after complying with specific disclosure requirements.

What did the Kerala Consumer Commission say about revised pricing?

The commission said that "there must be a marking/sticker on the goods indicating that the goods were pre-packed in the month in which the tax had been revised, or fresh tax had been imposed."

What compensation was finally awarded to the customer?

The Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission reduced the compensation to Rs 2,000 and litigation costs to Rs 1,000 while maintaining the refund of Rs 67.

What is the key takeaway from the ruling?

A retailer cannot legally charge above the printed MRP unless all legal requirements for revising and displaying the new price are properly followed.

(With TOI inputs)