Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 55.
Instituted on : 05.02.2018.
Decided on : 19.11.2018.
Mohit Ohalyan s/o Sh. Ravinder Ohalyan R/o Ward No.13 Sampla Tehsil Sampla Distt. Rothak -124001, Age 22, Mb. No.8295053070.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
Amazon Seller Service Private Limited, Brigade Gateway, 8th Floor 261, Dr. Rajkumar Road Malesavram West Bangalore Karnataka India Pin Code No.560055.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SH.VED PAL, MEMBER.
SMT.SAROJ BALA BOHRA, MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh.Sandeep Raj Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant has purchased a mobile set for Rs.32999/- on dated 09.08.2017 through online payment of SBI Debit Card. That the alleged set was purchased under Freedom Sale Cash Back Scheme and cash back of Rs.1500/- was to be paid by the company. That the alleged mobile was shown damage by the company without the knowledge of complainant and after confirmation from the company, he again placed an order on dated 16.08.2017 and a message was sent by the company that the cash back will be given upto 12.11.2017 to the complainant the but no cash back has been given by the company till date. That the act of opposite party is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of OP. As such, it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to pay the cashback amount of Rs.1500/- alongwith compensation and litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that complainant had placed an order for purchase of mobile set for Rs.32999/- on dated 09.08.2017 during cashback offer of Rs.1500/- available on SBI credit Cards but the said mobile phone was undelivered and was returned and the complainant was duly informed about the same telephonically. That complainant again order the same mobile phone on 16.08.2017. However, at that time the above said offer of cashback was not available from SBI and therefore complainant could not avail the cashback and the same was also informed to the complainant by ASSPL. That there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and dismissal of complaint has been sought..
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed his evidence. On the other hand ld. counsel for the OP has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, document Ex.R1 and closed his evidence.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that it is not denied by the opposite party that the complainant had placed an order for purchase of the mobile phone under cashback scheme of Rs.1500/-. It is also not disputed that the said mobile phone was undelivered due to failure of delivery attempts. The contention of the complainant is that he contacted the company official who advised the complainant to place an order again to take benefit of earlier order of cashback. So the complainant again placed an order but the cashback benefit was not given to the complainant. To prove his contention, complainant has placed on record copy of SMS Ex.C5 as per which complainant was entitled for cashback under the scheme of OP and it was to be credited upto 12.11.2017. Complainant has also placed on record copy of email dated 09.12.2017 placed on record as ‘Annexure-A’ at the time of arguments whereby it is admitted by the opposite party that : The complainant was provided incorrect information by their previous agent, “stating that they will issue the cashback outside the cashback period”. Hence from the documents placed on record, it is proved that the complainant was misleaded by the official of opposite party, due to which complainant again placed an order but could not get the benefit of cashback scheme. As such he is entitled for the alleged amount alongwith compensation.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and we hereby direct the opposite party to pay Rs.1500/-(Rupees one thousand five hundred only) towards cashback scheme and also to pay a sum of Rs.2000/-(Rupees two thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
8. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
19.11.2018.
.....................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………….
Ved Pal, Member.
……………………………….
Saroj Bala Bohra, Member
