Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/243/2016

Dhawal Bhandari - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amazon India - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

10 Mar 2017

ORDER

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

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	243 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	11.04.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	10.03.2017

 

 

 

Dhawal Bhandari s/o Sh.R.K.Bhandari, R/o House NO.3320, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh 160019

             …..Complainant

Versus

Amazon Seller Services Private Limited, ASPPL [CIN U51900KA2010PTC053234], Registered Office Address : Brigade Gateway, 8^th Floor, 26/1, Dr.Raj Kumar Road, Malleshwaram (W), Bangalore 560055 India through its duly authorised representative. 

….. Opposite Party  

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH             MEMBER 

        

 

Argued by:-

Complainant in person.

Sh.Manu Loona, Proxy Counsel for Sh.Nitin Thatai, Counsel for Opposite Party

 

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant placed an order with Opposite Party on 27.3.2016 for “Moto G Turbo (White)” mobile phone, having actual cost of Rs.12,499/- and in the promotion it was for Rs.4999/-.  The amount of Rs.4999/- has been paid by the complainant though online and subsequently order confirmation came via e-mail and sms stating that the order arriving on Wednesday, March 30 – Friday, April 1 (Ann.C-1).  It is averred that the complainant was shocked to see that Opposite Party on 28.3.2016 sent an e-mail cancelling his order (Ann.C-2).  Then the complainant randomly searched on internet and found that the Opposite Party has arbitrarily cancelled the order of many people. It is pleaded that by arbitrarily cancelling the order of the complainant and other persons, the Opposite Party have indulged into unfair trade practice and remained deficient in service.  It is also pleaded that the Opposite Party and other like companies used to take order at very low prices and later cancelled the orders. It is further pleaded that if the code was not generated by amazon and it was incorrect then how was the code applicable then and resulted in booking of the order. It is submitted that why OP took the payment and sent confirmation mail with invoice. Hence, alleging the above act & conduct of the Opposite Party as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply stating that the complainant has not bought any goods from ASSPL (Amazon Seller Services Private Limited) nor has the complainant paid any amount to ASSPL for the ordered product.  It is stated that the goods have been bought by the complainant from the independent third party seller selling its product on the website operated by the Opposite Party and thus, the complainant is not a consumer qua Opposite Party. 

         It is stated that the complainant placed order for Product ‘Moto G Turbo (White)’ on 27.3.2016 on the website of Opposite Party and thereafter, the order was cancelled due to pricing error, which was informed to the complainant on 28.3.2016.  It is pleaded that the complainant had redeemed a promotional code/discount amounting to Rs.7500/-, after application of which, the total amount paid by the complainant for the product was Rs.4999/- but due to the fact that the Opposite Party while processing the order, found that the said promotional code was not genuine and was never issued or displayed by the Opposite Party on its website and was an unauthorized coupon, so cancelled all the orders pertaining to the product during the intervening period.  It is also pleaded that the Opposite Party acts as a facilitator only and is in no manner responsible for listing and/or pricing of the product available on the website and the seller is solely responsible for any pricing error on the website to the total exclusion of Opposite Party.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.  

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of OP.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the complainant in person, ld.Counsel for Opposite Party and have also perused the entire record.

 

6]       Annexure C-4, filed by the complainant, along with his replication clinched the matter in dispute which clearly reveals the unfair trade practice resorted to by the Opposite Party and also clarified the deficiency in service on its part.  Annexure C-4 belied the reply filed by the Opposite Party wherein it states that because of technical error, a wrong promotional code was generated and they have cancelled all the orders booked on the date of dispute.

 

7]       Annexure C-4 reveals that the mobile in question, of the same make & model, as booked by the complainant, was duly supplied to another customer for the discounted price as offered in the promotion in dispute. The stand of the Opposite Party that it is only a facilitator between the trader and consumer and has no role to play in the entire transaction, is of no help to the Opposite Party to absolve itself from the liability towards the complainant on account of their resorting to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.

 

8]       The order of confirmation as well as cancellation e-mails respectively were generated at the end of the Opposite Party, so it is duly liable for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice resorted to by it.

 

9]       During the course of arguments, it got clarified that the complainant had received the refund of his amount paid Online for booking of the disputed order.  Since the amount in question has already been refunded to the complainant, so we deem it proper that the complainant be compensated for the harassment and mental agony suffered by him on account of OP's deficiency in service and its unscrupulous trade practice. Accordingly, the complaint is allowed with direction to the Opposite Party to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.7000/- as compensation as well as litigation expenses, within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it shall be liable to pay the awarded amount alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of filing this complaint till it is paid.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

10^th March, 2017                                                                             Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER