Orissa

Rayagada

CC/103/2018

Sri S.N. Mishra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amazon.in - Opp.Party(s)

Self

17 Sep 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

POST  /  DIST: Rayagada,  STATE:  ODISHA,12.10  Pin No. 765001.

                                                      ******************

C.C. Case  No. 103/ 2018.                                        Date.  17   . 09   . 2019.

P R E S E N T .

 

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                          President

Sri Gadadhara  Sahu,                                            Member.

Smt.Padmalaya  Mishra,.                                   Member

 

          Sri S.N.Mishra, Ellampeta,  Po/Dist: Rayagada(Odisha)      …….Complainant

Vrs.

1.Amazon. in seller services pvt. Ltd., 26/1, 10^th. Floor, Dr. Raj kumar road, Bangalore-560855.

2.The Manager, Wishpool Ecom LLp Gala No. 6 Building No. A/5/4, Ist. Floor, Dapola Mankili Road, Bhiwandi, Maharashtra-421301                          .…..Opp.Parties.

 

Counsel for the parties:                                 

For the complainant: - Self.

For the O.P No. 1    :-Sri  J.K.Mohapatra,  Advocate, Rayagada.

For the O.P.No.2:-  In person.

 

                                                JUDGEMENT.

The  curx of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non refund of price of the Electric Sewing machine household double stitches   a sum of Rs.2,499/- towards while using the same found   that the said machine was not functioning  for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

On being noticed the O.P. No. 1  has  filed written version through their learned counsel and contended   that  the present complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed against the O.P  No..1.  The O.P. No. 1    is  protected  by the provisions of Section-79 of the Information  Technology Act, 2000. The  O.P. No 1 neither offers  nor provides any assurance and/or offers 

                                                          //   2   //

warranty   to the     buyers  of the  product.. The  O.P.   No. 1 is  neither  a  ‘trader’ nor a ‘service provider’ and there does not exists any privity of contract   between the complainant and  the O.P. No.1.  The O.P. No. 1 is   only  limited  to providing on  line platform  to facilitate the whole transaction of sale and purchase of goods by the respective sellers and buyers on its  website. The O.P  No. 1  taking one and other pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.P No. 1...The O.P. No. 1   in their written version relied  citations of the apex court. The O.P No.1`  prays to dismiss the complaint petition against   O.P.  No. 1  for the best  interest   of justice.

During the  course of hearing  the complainant has filed memo inter alia submitted that    both the parties  have settled the above case amicably out of the forum and the complainant  has decided to withdraw the case.

Perused the memo filed by the complainant.

        This forum observed  after receipt of the notice from this forum   the parties are amicable settled between the complainant and O.Ps outside the forum and the complainant has already  received the price  of  the product i.e. Rs. 2,499/- from the O.P. No.2.

This forum further observed the O.Ps  considering the exigencies   of  the matter with out any basis   in the right time properly settled the disputes  at his end to avoid further litigation by  over looking  all the deficiencies  without contesting the present case  in the sense of humanitarian point of view  by following  the principles of  natural  justice in view of justice as contemplated  the  Modos  Operandi  of the O.Ps   no doubt  worthy of credence.

            During the course of hearing the complainant also consented to close the above case against the O.Ps

            We perused the documents   filed by the complainant  as well as the O.Ps. In our considered view   there is nothing  to disbelieve  the contents of the O.Ps regarding  their service  to  the satisfaction of the complainant  and forum do not find any reason  to hold the O.Ps.

            Accordingly the present dispute mitigated  and the  case stands disposed    and  O.Ps wriggled out of  liabilities & the  case closed against  them    as  the  complainant   do not want to  proceed  with  the case further against the O.Ps  after received Sewing machine price. Parties are left  to bear their own cost.

Dictated and corrected by me.  Pronounced on this      17 ^th.      Day of       September,   2019.

           

Member.                                                             Member.                                      President