Delhi

North East

RBT/CC/223/2022

ROBIN MANN - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMAZON SELLER SERVICES PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

25 Oct 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

RBT/Complaint Case No.223/22

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Robin Mann, S/o Shri. Virender Singh Mann, R/o 469/3, VPO- Khera Khurd, New Delhi	Complainant
	Versus
1.         2.	Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd., Through its CEO/MD. General Manager, Ground Floor, Eros Corporate Centre, Nehru Place New Delhi 110019   Appario Retail Private Ltd., Unit No. 1, Khewat/Khata No: 373/400 Mustatil No. 31, Village Taoru, Tehsil Taoru, District Mewat, On Bilaspur Taoru Road, Mewat, Haryana 122105	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                         DATE OF ORDER  :

22.03.2018 17.07.2023 25.10.2023

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

 

ORDER

 

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that on 24.02.2018 he had purchased a Apple Iphone X mobile phone from the Opposite Party   No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 98,499/- through online. As Complainant was the prime member of the Opposite Party No. 1, Opposite Party No. 1 assured the Complainant to deliver the said product within one day but they did not delivered the said product within time. On 26.02.2018 at about 06.00 p.m., Complainant received the delivery package from the delivery boy and when he opened the package then he found a patanjali dish wash soap instead of a mobile phone in original mobile phone box. After that the Complainant immediately informed the agent of the Opposite Party No. 1 who delivered the said package and he said that he would inform the said incident to his seniors and asked to call the customer care of Opposite Party No. 1. The agent of the Opposite Party No. 1 also told that Complainant got the refund or replacement soon. Complainant also recorded the video when opening the package of mobile phone box as a precautionary step. It is his case that he informed the customer care of Opposite Party No. 1 about the said incident and Opposite Party No. 1 assured the Complainant that they would investigate the matter. It is his case that after investigation Opposite Party No. 1 sent a mail stating that “after investigation, we have got an update that the package was present while delivering it to you, since we have different parameters to check this update. I am afraid that we are unable to process the refund or replacement for this issue. If you still do not have the package with you, we advise you to contact your local authorities, if necessary, to pursue this matter further.”  Complainant sent many e-mails to Opposite Party No. 1 but all in vain and till date they neither provided any replacement nor refund of the amount paid. Opposite Party No. 1 blocked the account of the Complainant and also cancelled the membership of the Complainant. Hence, this shows the deficiency of service of the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed to direct the Opposite Parties to refund the amount of the mobile phone along with interest, Rs. 3,50,000/- on account of mental harassment and Rs. 20,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

 Case of the Opposite Party No. 1

2. The Opposite Party No. 1 contested the case and filed its written statement. It is stated that the complaint is not maintainable and the allegations made in the complaint are false. It is stated that Opposite Party No. 1 does not sell or offer any goods. It is only a platform where independent third party seller can sell their products to the intended buyers. It is stated that Opposite Party No. 1 provides the services of online marketing where buyers and sellers may interact and complete purchasing. At no point of time any transaction took place between the Complainant and the Opposite Party No. 1. It is admitted that Complainant had placed an order for Apple Iphne X (Silver 256 GB) on 24.02.2018. It is stated that the said order was placed with the seller on the website and the same was delivered to the Complainant on 26.02.2018. It is denied that the Complainant received patanjali dish wash soap instead of mobile phone. It is admitted that the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party No. 1 on 26.02.2018. It is stated that after investigation it came to know that the order product was delivered to the Complainant in intact position. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

Case of the Opposite Party No. 2

3. The Opposite Party No. 2 contested the case and filed its written statement. It is stated that the allegations made in the complaint are false. It is alleged that the Complainant has failed to bring on record any deficiency of service of fraud against Opposite Party No. 2. The allegations of the Complainant have been denied and it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Parties

4. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Parties wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Parties and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Complainant

5. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the averments made in the complaint.

Evidence of the Opposite Party No. 1

6. To support its case Opposite Party No. 1 has filed affidavit of Sh. Rahul Sundaram, wherein, he has supported the case of Opposite Party No. 1 as mentioned in the written statement.

Evidence of the Opposite Party No. 2

7. To support its case Opposite Party No. 2 has filed affidavit of Sh. Shine Joy, wherein, he has supported the case of Opposite Party No. 2 as mentioned in the written statement.

Arguments & Conclusion

8. We have heard the Complainant and Ld. Counsel for Opposite Party No. 1. None has appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2 to address the arguments.  We have also perused the file and written arguments filed by the Complainant and Opposite Parties. The case of the Complainant is that he has purchased one Apple Iphone X mobile phone through online shopping from Opposite Party No. 1. His case is that on receiving the package he opened the package and the process of opening the package was recorded in the CCTV camera installed in his house. He has also filed a CD of the said footage along with the complaint. His case is that after opening the package instead of mobile phone one patanjali dish wash soap was found in the package. The case of Opposite Party No. 1 is that it did not sell any mobile phone to the Complainant and it is only a platform meant for online shopping where the buyers and sellers interact and in the said process Opposite Party No. 1 has no role to play.  The Opposite Party No. 2 has simply denied the allegations of the Complainant in its written statement and evidence.
9. Admittedly, the Complainant has placed an order for online purchase of mobile phone. This order was placed with Opposite Party No. 1. The Complainant has placed the copy of the invoice of Rs. 98,499/-. The perusal of the said invoice shows that the said mobile phone was sold by Opposite Party No. 2 and the invoice has been signed by the authorized signatory of Opposite Party No. 2. The case of the Complainant as discussed above is that instead of mobile phone he was delivered a package containing a patanjali dish wash soap. In order to prove his assertion, the Complainant has filed the copy of CD of the footage of CCTV camera installed in the house of the Complainant. This CD was played and this shows that one patanjali dish wash soap was found in the package delivered to the Complainant. The package/carton was having the logo of amazon. Thus, the Complainant has discharged the initial burden of proving his case. On the other hand, the Opposite Parties have not discharged their onus to prove their stand. The Complainant has placed on record the copy of the email dated 06.03.2018, sent to the Complainant by Opposite Party No. 1. The perusal of the same shows that in the said email it is written as under “I am sorry to know about your experience and I appreciate you taking time to share your concerns”. It is the case of the Opposite Party No. 1 as revealed from the said email that investigation was conducted by its team however what was the outcome of investigation has not been filed on record for the reasons best known to Opposite Party No. 1. Similarly, Opposite Party No. 2 has not led any evidence to show that the mobile phone was packed in the carton which was delivered to the Complainant. It has not led any evidence to show that no patanjali dish wash soap was put in the said carton. The delivery was given by the Opposite Party No. 2. It has not conducted any internal investigation to find out the truth and rather has simply denied the assertions of the Complainant in its written statement as well as in its evidence.
10. In view of the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the Complainant has proved his case, so the complaint is allowed. An amount of  Rs. 98,499/- is awarded to the Complainant i.e. price of the mobile phone along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. A compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- is awarded to the Complainant on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery. In the present case, the Complainant has done online purchasing through amazon which is an international name. The Complainant has not done online shopping simply with Opposite Party No. 2. The product was allegedly supplied by Opposite Party No. 2 and payment was also received by it. So, both the parties shall jointly and severally liable to pay the above mentioned payments to the Complainant.  
11. Order announced on 25.10.2023.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)		(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)		(President)