PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No- 32/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Mohammed Mustaq Ansari,

S/O- Mohammed Mubaraq Ansari,

R/O-Brookshill Colony, Near Kinderkin School,

Po/Dist-Sambalpur, Odisha.                                .……….......Complainant

Vrs.

1. M/S Sanitizo.co

(Represented Through Its Manager/ Authorised Person)

Karol Bagh

PO/Dist-New Delhi(India)-110001.

2. M/S Invo Retail

Plot No. 122, Basement D Block

Sectror-7, Noida, Gautham Budh Nagar(U.P.)

PIN-201301                                                                   ...……….Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant       :- Self
2. For the O.P.s                     :- Ex-parte

Date Of Filing :10.03.2023,Date Of Hearing :18.07.2023, Date Of Judgement : 21.08.2023

Presented by Sri Sadananda Tripathy, Member.

1. The Brief fact of the Complainant is that the Complainant has purchased a product namely “Car Scratch Repair Wax/Liquid Scratch Repair Wax” after being came across through and advertisement in “Youtube” wherein the product has been portrayed and described as the most useful and effective in removing and eliminating all unwanted scratches and marks, daily road grimes, tough stains, oxidation, bird droppings, sun spots, insect splatter, dirts and so on from the car in addition to having an impressive hydrophobic quality that greatly repel all rain, water and oil. The advertisement too contains pictures and a video graphic demonstration of the product in proof to its usefulness, effortless application and end results which appeared to be highly influencing. On being influenced by the demonstration and contents of the advertisement, the Complainant ordered a set of products @ Rs. 999/- and the product has been delivered on 31.10.2022 . The Complainant applied the product on his car as and where required after properly following the instructions over the product itself as well as after minutely observing the demonstration on the advertisement and he found the product to be extremely ineffective and unworthy of removing even minor scratches over his car rather he experienced a damaging effect of the product on his car. The Complainant tried to communicate on the contact information found to have reflected and mentioned in the advertisement as well as in the official webpage of the OP but could not reach out because the contact information does not exist. Finding no other option, the Complainant on dtd. 24^th November, 2022 issued a notice to the OPs but the notice of the OP No. 1 returned back with the endorsement “Insufficient Address” whereas the notice sent to the OP No. 2 held sufficient as duly been served. On 29^th November 2022 the Complainant received a phone call which appeared to have been received from the side of the OP NO. 2 as identified by the caller itself. The caller on the other side somehow tried to justify their product but simultaneously on hearing the Complainant agreed to refund the amount spent by the Complainant on its purchase. However, the caller refused to compensate the Complainant for the wrong as well as for the wrongful loss committed to the Complainant, the Complainant refused to accept the refund and the call was disconnected. Thereafter, the Complainant has neither received any reply from the side of the OPs nor any steps is taken by the OPs to make good the loss experienced by the Complainant. The application of the product over the car of the Complainant has caused injury and damage to his property and subsequent conduct of the OPs had too caused mental agony and disturbance to the Complainant.
2. The OPs neither appeared nor gave their version.
3. From the submission and evidence it is found that the OPs have not taken any steps to solve the issue where as the product sold by them to the Complainant caused damage to the vehicle.  The Complainant further submitted that the OP No.1 is operated by the OP NO. 2. The O.Ps are misleading the customers to sale their product which amounts to unfair trade practice. Accordingly, it is order:

                             ORDER

The O.P No. 2 is directed to refund an amount of Rs. 999/- towards cost of the product paid by the Complainant while purchasing the product with 9% interest from the date of purchase till realisation , Rs. 1,00,000/- towards damage suffered by the Complainant upon his car due to the application of the product, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards physical strain and mental agony suffered by the Complainant as compensation and Rs. 20,000/- towards cost of litigation expenses to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of order, failing which the amount will carry with 9% interest per annum till realization to the complainant.

Order pronounced in the open Court today on 21^st day of August, 2023.

Free copies of this order to the parties are supplied.