|
    Theme
    Business Verified Story

    Consumer court orders clothing brand to refund bag charge

    Saba QamarSeptember 19, 2026 2 min read
    Text Size
    Consumer court orders clothing brand to refund bag charge
    Business CoverageAman-e-Pakistan Digital Desk
    Key Story Executive Summary
    Quick Read

    A consumer protection court has accepted a complaint against a leading clothing brand, directing the company to refund Rs30 charged to a customer for a shopping bag, pay her Rs25,000 in compensation, …

    Consumer Case No 84/CC of 2026 was decided by Judge Nasrullah Khan Gandapur of the Consumer Protection Court, who heard arguments from complainant's counsel Ahsan Sardar and the brand's counsel Muhammad Omea.

    The complainant, Shafaq Aamir, had filed the case on February 14 under Section 13 of the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Consumer Protection Act, 1997, alleging that on December 20, 2025, she purchased clothing worth Rs7,000 from the outlet of the clothing brand on Peshawar's University Road and was additionally charged Rs30 for a carrying bag printed with the brand's promotional logo.

    The respondent did not deny the allegation, but contended that it was not obligated to provide bags free of cost and offered them only on specific customer demand.

    Key Story Takeaway

    "Stay connected with Aman-e-Pakistan for ongoing live reporting and verified investigative updates."

    In his judgment, Judge Gandapur observed that the receipt annexed with the complaint clearly showed the extra Rs30 charge, and that customers were under the belief that purchased items would be delivered in a carrying bag without charges.

    The court observed that the bag, bearing the brand's logo, was "obviously provided for promotion of the brand and that too at the cost of the consumers," noting that the company would otherwise have to provide ordinary bags to customers.

    "The respondent not only charged the complainant an extra amount but also used the bag for promotion of its brand," the judgment read, holding the practice to be an unfair trade practice under Section 2(O)(xii)(xiii) of the Act.

    The decision was announced on September 16 after the court perused the record and heard both sides under Section 14(2)(b) of the Act. The file has been consigned to the record room after completion.

    S

    Written by Saba Qamar

    Aman-e-Pakistan Senior Journalist & Bureau Reporter

    Fact Checked & Verified

    Continue Reading: More in Business

    Swipe or click arrows to explore Business desk coverage

    Grocery merchants reject 'smart lockdown'Business

    Grocery merchants reject 'smart lockdown'

    Read Story
    'Financial strain poses threat to fuel supplies'Business

    'Financial strain poses threat to fuel supplies'

    Read Story
    Trump says his son Russian oligarch for wedding partiesBusiness

    Trump says his son Russian oligarch for wedding parties

    Read Story
    Russians vote in parliamentary pollsBusiness

    Russians vote in parliamentary polls

    Read Story
    Warren Buffett steps downBusiness

    Warren Buffett steps down

    Read Story
    New US sanctions bill on Russia puts India's Modi in a bindBusiness

    New US sanctions bill on Russia puts India's Modi in a bind

    Read Story