15.06.2017 Present:- Sh.Amit Goyal, counsel for complainant.
IPO worth Rs.100/- deposited with the complaint as fee be deposited in the relevant head as per notification dated.10.02.2005 by the Superintendent.
Heard on the point of admission of complaint.
Briefly, the case of the complainant is that opposite party No.2 advertised through Amazon (opposite party No.1) online website that it has launched and it sells laptop HP 15AY516 TX 15.6 inch (6th Gen Core i56200U/4GB/1TB/Free Dose 2.0/2GB (Graphics) Turbo Silver. The complainant booked one laptop of Rs.21,222/- vide order dated 26.5.2017. The laptop was to be delivered at Bathinda. The complainant deposited the amount on 20.5.2017 through net banking.
It is alleged that opposite parties have failed to deliver the laptop on the plea that it is not deliverable at Bathinda, but record reveals that the laptop reached only up to Ludhiana on 24.5.2017 and then was sent back to opposite parties. The complainant approached opposite parties and requested them to deliver the laptop as per scheme, but they refused to deliver it and demanded huge amount of laptop of Rs.48,538/- i.e its full value. Opposite parties have also refunded the amount in the account of the complainant.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. He has claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.40,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.5500/-. He has also prayed for directions to opposite parties to deliver the laptop as per scheme.
Learned counsel for complainant has reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint and detailed above. It is further submitted by learned counsel for complainant that opposite parties were fully aware that the product is to be delivered at Bathinda, but they have failed to deliver the product at Bathinda. The transportation slip also proves that the product reached only up to Ludhiana and then it was sent back. Therefore, opposite parties are guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
We have given careful consideration to these submissions.
The complainant has himself pleaded that he has placed order and paid amount, which has been received back after couple of days. Of-course, opposite parties have not delivered the product on the ground that it is undeliverable at Bathinda, but the total price received from the complainant has been repaid within 3 days. In these circumstances, no deficiency in service can be attributed on the part of opposite parties. Therefore, the complaint is hereby dismissed.
A copy of this order be sent to the complainant free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced:-
15.6.2017
(Jarnail Singh) (M.P.S Pahwa)
Member President
