PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                                                           CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 193/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Sri. Spandan Panda,

S/O-Satyanarayan Panda,

R/O- L2/10, Jagannath Mandir Colony, Po-Budhraja, ,

Ps-Ainthapali, Sambalpur,

Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha-768004.

Mob No. 7735207475                                          ………………Complainant

-Vrs-

1. Flipkart India Private Limited Vaishnavi Summit

Ground Floor, 7^th main, 80 feet Road, 3^rd Block,

Koramangala Industrial Layout, Bangalore KA-560034.

2. Consulting Rooms Private Limited,

Mauza-Kumbharabasta, Khatian No. 523/53, Tahasil-Khurda

Thana No.-116, Bhubaneswar-752054,

Bhubansewar,Odisha-752054, (GSTIN-21AAGCC4236P1ZL).

3. Samsung India Electronics Private Limited,

6^th Floor, DLF centre, Sansad Marg,

New Delhi-110001.                                              ………………Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :- Sri. S.K. Mishra & Associates
2. For the O.P. No.1               :- None filed Vnama
3. For the O.P. No.2                           :- Ex-parte.
4. For the O.P. No.3                           :- Sri. S.K. Mohanty & Associates

Date of Filing:02.11.2023,Date of Hearing :12.03.2023,Date of Judgement : 22.04.2024

  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant on 31.07.2023 ordered a fully automatic washing machine of Samsung Electronics India Ltd. O.P. No.3 using mobile app of O.P. No.1 vide order ID: OD-428767873534848100 and invoice No. #FAIFEW-2400023897 dated 01.08.2023 through its supplying associates, the O.P. no.2. O.P. no.1 delivered through agent on 02.08.2023 in a sealed and packed box and delivery boy denied to unbox it at spot and prior inspection received payment of Rs. 32,990/- through UPI payment mode.

The delivery agent asked to provide O.T.P. for such delivery and assured if the product found damaged or defective then the O.P. no.1 would take it back as a part of its service policy. OTP was disclosed. Sealed box was unpacked and found that the washing machine in visible damaged physically. There is a gap of 3 C.M. between upper body cover and bottom part. The delivery agent declined to take back and advised to intimate O.P. no.1. Replacement/return request made to O.P. No.1.

On 04.08.2023 authorised technician of O.P. No.3 visited for installation of machine Sl. No 050B5PBW500391 advised for return of damaged machine and supplied inspection cum visit report. Replacement request made through O.P. no.1. Again on 08.03.2023 the technician arrived and after inspection submitted a report citing the damage of front body and back body. All request of complainant was in vain after complaint on 04.08.2023, 06.08.2023, 07.08.2023, 11.08.2023, 22.08.2023 and 25.08.2023. Lastly O.P. no.1 refused for such return.

On 24.08.2023 the Complainant sent an e-mail for replacement as a legal notice and thereafter filed the complaint.

2. In reply, the O.P. No.3 submitted O.P. No.1 & 2 are intermediary companies and provide digital platform. The manufacturer assures to render free services during the warranty in force limiting to repairing or providing replacement of parts. This is not a case of claim for service under limited and agreed upon warranty terms. This is nota case of denial of rendering services in terms of warranty conditions, and as such, this is not a case of manufacturing defects in good or deficiency in services and premature complaint against O.P. no.3. The Complainant during installation service stated claiming return of product or refund of the price which is an agreement with the seller of the product. This is not a case of manufacturing defects as revealed from the investigation conducted by the technical team of O.P. No.3.

The O.P. no.2 enquired about the incident from O.P. No.1 and received  a reply mail where they confirmed that trying to resolve the dispute on priority basis.

          There is no deficiency in service or manufacturing defects.

3. The O.P. 2 have not filed any version nor documents.
4. The Complainant filed the following documents:

1. In voice No. #FAIFEW 2400023897 dated 01.08.2023.
2. Samsung Invoice affixed on seal package.
3. Photograph of the original image on receiving damaged machine.
4. Communication made with O.P.No.1.
5. Samsung technician report dated 05.08.2023.
6. Request for return/replacement of the product.
7. Notice dated 24.08.2023.

The O.P. no.3 filed following documents:

1. Warranty Card.
2. Customer Service record.
3. Photographs of the product.

5. The O.P. No.1 submitted that the O.P. No. 1 a whole seller and not operate any e-commerce platform. The Complainant is not a consumer of O.P. no.1 Flipkart.Com is the marketplace platform, separate body entity. There is no privity on contract. The O.P. no.1 is B2B wholesaler.
6. Perused the documents filed by the parties There is similarity in name of the O.P. No.1 and Flipkart.com companies as it reveals from submission of O.P. no.1 Flipkart.com is the market place and intermediary. The O.P. No.2 consulting Rooms Pvt. Ltd. is the seller and O.P. no.3 is the manufacturer. Since from the date of delivery of the product on 02.08.2023 the defects in product arose. On 08.08.2023 it was remarked by the O.P. No.3 service personnel that “Back body and front body broken” and it is broken at the time of delivery. Hence question of manufacturing defects not arise. Before installation the defects arose. It was the duty of O.P. No.2 to deliver the product in safe condition as the O.P. No.2 received the full consideration amount of Rs. 32,990/- including shipping and handling charges.

Accordingly, the O.P. no.1 & 3 are not liable for supply of the defective product.

Taking into consideration the circumstances of the case following order is passed:

ORDER

The complaint is dismissed against O.P. no.1 & 3 on contest and allowed exparte against O.P. no.2. The O.P. No.2 is directed to replace the damaged product within one month of this order. In case of non-replacement the O.P. No.2 is liable to pay Rs. 32,990/- with 12% interest w.e.f. 01.08.2023 till realisation. For harassment and deficiency in service the O. No.2 is liable to pay compensation of Rs. 20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/-.

            Order pronounced in the open Court today on 22^th day of April, 2024.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.