Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/487/2018

Ashima Dutt - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amazon India - Opp.Party(s)

Shiti Jain Dutt Adv.

26 Jun 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	487 of 2018
Date  of  Institution	:	30.08.2018
Date   of   Decision	:	26.06.2019

 

 

 

 

Ashima Dutt w/o Sh.Arvind Dutt, resident of H.No.2163, Sector 21/C, Chandigarh 160022

             ……..Complainant

Versus

 

1]  Amazon India, Brigade Gateway, 8^th Floor, 26/1, Dr.Raj Kumar Road, Malleshwaram (W), Bangalore 560055, Karnataka thorough its Proprietor/Manager/Authorised Signatory.

 

2]  Shree Jain Chemical Industries, F-271, Mandia Road, Pali, Rajasthan 306401, through its Proprietor/Manager/Authorised Signatory.

 

………. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN            PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA        MEMBER

            SH.RAVINDER SINGH         MEMBER

 

Argued By: Ms.Shiti Jain Dutt, Adv. for complainant.

Sh.Yugansh Siwach, Adv. for Opposite Party No.1

Opposite Party NO.2 exparte.

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

         The case of the complainant, in brief is that she ordered one Roots D Botanica Ultra Clear Melt & Pour Soap Base, weighing 1Kg by paying a price of Rs.378.83 from the online site of Opposite Party NO.1 wherein the product is sold by Opposite Party No.2 (Ann.C-1 & C-2). It is averred that the product which the complainant received was packed in a plastic box, but it neither mentions the details about the product, name of manufacturer, ingredients of product, manufacturing or expiry date, customer care number nor MRP of product, which is totally in violation of Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodity) Rules, 2011 (Ann.C-3).  It is stated that this product is a soap base which has to be used to make bathing soaps, but there were no instructions on it. It is also stated that the Opposite Parties are misleading the customers by mentioning an MRP of said product and by showing a discount on it on their online site, whereas no MRP is mentioned on the product which is sent to the complainant, so there is no way the complainant can find out the actual MRP of the received product and there is also a possibility that the OPs are showing fake price and discounts on the product on their online site.  Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging the said act & conduct of the OPs as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, seeking compensation for being cheated and mislead.

 

2]       The Opposite Party NO.1/Amazon India has filed reply stating that the complainant has not bought any goods directly from ASSPL (Amazon Seller Service Private Limited) nor has the complainant paid any amount/consideration to ASSPL for the purchased product and that the goods have been bought by the complainant from the independent third party seller selling its product on the website operated by answering Opposite Party No.1.  It is stated that the complainant purchased one D’Root Botanica Melt & Pour Ultra Soap Base vide order No.404-7683803-6005105 from the third party seller – Shree Jain Chemical Industries. It is submitted that the products on the website of ASSPL are listed and sold by the independent third party seller and not ASSPL.  The complaint pertains to the details about the product (ingredients, maximum retail price, manufactured/expiry date) as desired by the complainant, which can only be ascertained by the Seller and the concerned manufacturer and not by the answering Opposite Party. It is stated that the allegations and grievance of the complainant pertains to OP No.2 and not to Opposite Party No.1.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, Opposite Party No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint qua it. 

         The Opposite Party No.2 did not turn up despite service of notice sent through regd. post on 5.9.2018, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 09.10.2018.

 

3]       Complainant also filed rejoinder thereby reiterating the assertions made in the complaint.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

 

6]       Admittedly, the complainant ordered one Roots D Botanica Ultra Clear Melt & Pour Soap Base for Rs.378.83 from the online site of Opposite Party NO.1 and got its delivery. 

 

7]       The grouse of the complainant is that the said product does not carry any disclosure about the name of manufacturer, ingredients, MRP, manufacturing & expiry date or even the customer care number.

 

8]       After going through the complaint as well giving due consideration to the arguments submitted by ld.Counsel for complainant, ld.Counsel for Opposite Party NO.1 and perusing the entire record, we are of the considered view that the present compliant is not covered under the purview of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the matter/dispute, in question needs to be taken up before the concerned authorities dealing under the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodity), Rules, 2011 and Consumer Goods (Mandatory Printing of Cost of Production and Maximum Retail Price), Act, 2006.

 

9]       The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been enacted to protect the rights of gullible consumers from the clutches of unscrupulous traders and unfair trade practice adopted by them.  The complaints regarding defective goods & the deficiency in service are taken up under The Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

         The complainant herself admitted in the complaint that product in question ordered is a soap base which has to be further used to make bathing soaps revealing that the base ordered is raw material to be further used to prepare bathing soaps and not the final product, which under the relevant provisions of the Legal Metrology rules is bound to carry certain disclosure as per the requirement of the relevant Act.  We are of the considered opinion that the liability of the manufacturer towards a ‘consumer’ arose only in case of sale of final product and the complaint, if any, in regards to the raw material is to be filed with the appropriate authority. 

 

10]      In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the complaint being not maintainable, is hereby dismissed.  The complainant is at liberty to approach appropriate authority for redressal of her grievance.

         Certified copy of this order be sent to the complainant, free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced

26^th June, 2019            

                                                                                      Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

                                                                                               

Sd/-

                                                                    (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER