DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 64 of  2022

 

Sri Surajit Roy,

S/O- Lt. Chitta Ranjan Roy,

Chitta Ranjan Road, Agartala,

P.O. College Tilla, P.S. East Agartala,

District- West Tripura- 799001. ….....Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1. Amazon India Pvt. Ltd.,

Having its Registered office at

Brigade Gateway 8th Floor,

26/1, Dr. Rajkumar Road,

Malleswaram, Bangalore- 560055.

 

2. Indian Bank,

Agartala Branch,

Having its Registered office at

Indian Overseas Mansion, 15 H.G.B. Road,

Agartala, West Tripura- 799001. ............Opposite Parties.

 

    __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

  WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : Sri Debanjan Datta Choudhury,

  Sri Rahul Deb,

  Smt. Monoswaee Dey,

  Sri Rakesh Hrishi Das,

  Sri Vibek Deb,

  Learned Advocates.

 

For the O.Ps : Ex-parte.

 

 

 

ORDER  DELIVERED  ON:   03.03.2023.

 

F I N A L    O R D E R

The case led to the proceedings due to a complaint petition being filed by Sri Surajit Roy (here-in-after referred to as ‘the Complainant’) against the Amazon India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore (here-in-after referred to as ‘the O.P.1’) and Indian Bank, Agartala Branch (here-in-after referred to as the ‘O.P.2’) under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act., 2019.

 

The averments of the case, in brief, is that the Complainant noticed and tracked some unauthorized payments done through his Bank Account, which is maintained with O.P.2, in the form of debit transactions from 22.01.2021 to 15.04.2021. The payments were done against purchase of Amazon Gift Card from O.P.1 and the aggregated amount for such illegal transactions was Rs. 49,000/-. The Complainant was clueless about purchase of such gift cards. On being taken up the matter with the Customer Care Service of the O.P.1, the Complainant was initially assured that the disputed amount should be refunded to him but later on the O.P.1 backtracked by saying that refund of money was not possible, as demanded for such alleged wrong transactions. Being aggrieved so the Complainant filed this petition to this Commission for redressal of his grievances and sought a relief for refund of Rs. 49,000/- along with compensation. Hence, this case.

 

Though notice was served upon the O.P.1 and 2, they failed to appear and contest the case by submitting written version and hence, the case proceeded exparte against O.P.1 and O.P.2.

 

The Complainant filed his evidence on affidavit by replicating the issues and grievance raised/ ventilated in the complaint petition along with certain documents notably, the Bank Statement showing the alleged illegitimate transactions and a system-generated document released by the O.P.1, inter-alia, displaying details of orders for purchase of the Gift Cards, in question, in relation to the alleged fraudulent payment transactions.

 

The matter was argued by the Complainant himself. O.P.1, submitted written argument whereby they disproved and denied the charges / allegations levelled against them.

 

We have heard the arguments of the Complainant and perused the written argument furnished by O.P.1. We have scrupulously examined the documents submitted by the Complainant. It is noted with surprise that the Complainant initially averred that the alleged illegitimate transactions were done towards purchase of Amazon Gift Card but eventually ended up correcting the same as for purchase of Google Pay Gift Cards (in short ‘the gift Cards’) through submission of evidence.

 

7. On evaluation of the Bank Statement, we observed that the allegedly illegal payment transactions, so being done in various occasions from 22.01.2021 to 15.04.2021, were for e-commerce purchases. But, nothing has been specified in the Bank Statement regarding the actual receiver of such payments i.e., payee. Therefore, we could not discover the real identity of the payee. The Complainant, thus, failed to substantiate his point of allegation regarding receipt of payments by O.P.1 for the alleged fraudulent transactions done from 22.01.2021 to 15.04.2021 by submitting valid documentary evidence.

 

Furthermore, it becomes apparent to us from the system-generated document of O.P.1, manifesting certain orders in relation to purchase of the Gift Cards, that no corresponding value against the individual gift card order is mentioned. Which is why we are unable to assess the actual purchase value of gift cards against each alleged fraudulent payment transaction. It is also observed that the number of date-wise orders of the Gift Cards, so mentioned in the document, does not tally with the number of payment transactions shown to have been made towards purchase against such orders from 22.01.2021 to 15.04.2022.

 

9. From the afore-mentioned points explained, we are of the view that the Complainant was unable produce valid documents corroborating his claim of illegal payment transactions done through his Bank Account from 22.01.2021 to 15.04.2021 towards purchasing of the Gift Cards from O.P.1.

 

Now, we unhesitatingly hold that the Complainant was not successful to prove his case to the satisfaction of the Commission. In the result, the petition of the Complainant fails. Hence, the case stands dismissed for want of adequate documentary evidence.

 

  11.  The case, accordingly, is disposed of. Supply

  copy of this Final Order free of cost to the parties.

 

Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI  GOUTAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER,

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,AGARTALA.