THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C.375/2017

Dated this the 7^th day of January, 2019

(Smt. Rose Jose, B.Sc, LLB.              :  President)

                                                                        Sri. Joseph Mathew, M.A., L.L.B.      :  Member

ORDER

Present: Hon’ble Joseph Mathew, Member:       

This petition is filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Petitioner’s case is that,. She placed an order to the 1^st opposite party Amazon online purchase, for the purchase of a product of the 2^nd opposite party LAMROD Company viz. Lamrod GPS Tracker on 19/11/2016 worth Rs.2,199/- and it was delivered to her on 03/12/2016. When used it started malfunctioning. Immediately this fact was informed to the 2^nd opposite party Lamrod Company through their whatsapp service and as per their instruction she had rectified certain defects. But thereafter the defects started cropping up on a daily basis making rectification difficult for her and lastly on 17/01/2017 the system stopped functioning. In spite of following the instructions given by the Lamrod customer care the problem could not be solved.

It is stated by the petitioner that, since the problem with the product repeated, she contacted the company frequently but there was only the same evasive response form their side. Moreover the company blocked her mobile number in the whatsapp service also. So she contacted the Lamrod whatsapp service through another number and they advised to renew the software. Accordingly she had renewed the software on 12/06/2017 after paying Rs.599/- but that also could not rectify the defects. It is stated that as per their advertisement the product carries one year warranty and no hidden charges like software renewal. Due to the continuous problems with the product she had written comments on her Amazon account and thereupon the company contacted her and informed that for availing one year warranty she has to register on their website through a link. As such she had completed all the procedures on their website as directed but there was no response from Lamrod customer care.

It is further stated that after some days when she opened her Amazon account, her comments on the device were found deleted. The company had hacked her Amazon account also. So she directly applied for the warranty again through their website even though she had already registered for the warranty on May 2017. Since there was no response from the company she issued a lawyer notice to the company’s Head Office, New Delhi but the notice returned because the address given by the company was fake. Thereafter she had contacted the Amazon customer care and informed them the matter of hacking of her account and the fact that the company’s address given was fake, but no action was taken by them in this matter or redress her grievances or provided her the correct address of Lamrod Company.

The petitioner alleged that, the supply of a defective product to a customer is unfair trade practice on the part of the company and arranging platform for the sale of defective goods of such fake companies like the 2^nd opposite party Lamrod is deficiency in service on the part of the 1^st opposite party Amazon. Due to the defect of the product she could not use the same even for a few days and the indifferent attitude of both the opposite parties in resolving her grievance even after repeated requests caused much financial loss, mental agony and such other inconveniences to her. So the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate her for the difficulties suffered. Hence this petition is filed to direct the 2^nd opposite party to replace the defective product with a defect free new one and to refund the amount of Rs.599/- which she had paid for renewing the software within the warranty period and to pay her Rs.3,90,000/- as compensation for her sufferings and to direct the 1^st opposite party to pay her Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation by them and also cost of the proceedings.

The notice issued to the 1^st opposite party from this Forum returned unclaimed. The 2^nd opposite party received notice but didn’t turn up or filed version. Hence both the opposite parties set ex-parte.

The petitioner filed affidavit in lieu of her petition and produced documents in support of her averments and was marked as Ext. A1 to A4 as evidence on the side of the petitioner. Ext. A1 is the copy of whatsapp chat history between the petitioner and the 2^nd opposite party from 02/01/2017 to 03/09/2017., Ext. A2 is the copy of receipt for the remittance of Rs.599/- for renewal of software, Ext. A3 is the copy of e-mail and whatsapp messages sent to the 2^nd opposite party informing the details of the case pending against them before this Forum and Ext. A4 is the copy of e-mail and whatsapp messages sent to the 1^st opposite party by the petitioner.

The opposite parties didn’t file version challenging the allegations of the petitioner against them or adduced any evidence rebutting the veracity of the documents marked as evidence on the side of the petitioner. So the case of the petitioner stands unchallenged and proved. Considering the facts stated and evidence on record, we are also of the view that the said act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and also deficiency in service on their part.

The petitioner is demanding a total amount of Rs.4,90,000/- as compensation from the opposite parties apart from the amount of Rs.599/- paid for renewing software for the losses and other hardships suffered. It is true that the defect of the product caused much inconveniences and mental agony to the petitioner but for awarding compensation, it needs clear evidence of exact loss sustained by the customer due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Here, no evidence was adduced by the petitioner in this regard. So in the absence of clear evidence of loss sustained by the petitioner, her prayer for the said amount as compensation is not admissible. Even then she is entitled to get a reasonable amount as compensation for her sufferings.

In the result, the following order is passed.

The 1^st opposite party is ordered to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as compensation to the petitioner for the deficiency in service on their side and the 2^nd opposite party is ordered to pay total amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) (which includes the price of the product purchased and the amount spent for replacing the software) and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred only) as cost of the proceedings to the petitioner within 60days from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which the whole amount will carry 10% interest per annum from the date of default till payment. The 2^nd opposite party can take back the defective GPS Tracker from the petitioner after payment of the ordered amount.

Dated this the 7^th day of January, 2018

Date of filing: 19/10/2017

                           SD/-PRESIDENT                SD/-MEMBER

 APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Copy of whatsapp chat history

A2. Copy of receipt

A3. Copy of e-mails and whatsapp messages

A4. Copy of e-mails and whatsapp messages

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

Nil

Witness examined for the complainant:

None

Witness examined for the opposite party:

None                                                           

Sd/-President

//True copy//

(Forwarded/By Order)

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT