DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 28th day of November 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member
CC/06/2022
Date of Filing: 10.01.2022
Vasanthakumaran,
House No: 3/54,
Opposite Masjid, Kunnumpuram,
Kalpathy (Post)
Palakkad- 678 003
(By Adv.S. Sidharthan ) - Complainant
Vs
1 Amazon.in
World Trade Centre ,
Brigade gate way,
Dr. Rajkumar Road,
Malleswaram,
Banglore-560055 .
2. SBI Cards and Payment service Ltd
DLF Infinity tower, Tower C
12th Floor, Block 2, Building 3
DLF Cyber City, Haryana . Pin- 122 022.
(Both Opposite parties- Ex-parte) - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Smt.Vidya A., Member
1. Pleadings of the complainant in brief.
The complainant ordered a ‘Butterfly Jet Mixer Grinder’ through Amazon.in on 13.08.2021 vide order No. 40684163910506737. The payment mode selected by the complainant was cash on delivery. The item was delivered to him on 17.08.2021. As it was Lock down period due to Covid 19 they requested the complainant to change the payment option and make the payment through bank. The complainant tried to make the payment through SBI credit card (master card ending with 4 digits xxx xxx 4119). But the payment could not be effected through Amazon link and later a message of failed transaction came to his mobile phone. At that time the delivery agent opted for cash payment
and the complainant gave Rs. 3210/- by cash 17.08.2021 and later they returned the balance of Rs. 1/- to his Amazone Pay Balance.
The item was delivered to him on 17.08.2021- 4.30 P.M and after one hour of delivery, a message came to his phone as Rs. 3209/- debited from his SBI card and credited in favour of the Amazon India regional office at Bengaluru. When the complainant came to know about the double payment, he contacted the Amazon seller and sought remedy. They informed him that the excess amount will be refunded to his SBI credit card immediately. But it did not happen even after one week. Then he approached both the opposite parties and they instructed him to raise dispute in this regards. Then he lodged 2 complaints on 25.05.2021 and on 10.09.2021. The Bank’s stand was that their merchant bank confirmed the payment and its proof given to Amazon.
Long term process was going on between SBI credit card and Amazon to refund the excess amount. The complainant did not get the money. On 13th October 2021, he got a message from Amazon in which they confirmed that the complainant’s payment mode was cash and not any banking method. Again on 2nd November 2021, Amazon gave a reply and they confirmed that the amount is reverted back against the pay link transaction to SBI credit card. But the amount is not credited in his account so far.
The complainant is experiencing mental agony due to this and this complaint is filed to get the refund of excess amount paid by him and to get Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for the mental stress and cost of the litigation.
2. Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. 1st opposite party received notice and 2nd opposite party’s notice not returned. E-mail was sent in their e-mail ID. As the opposite parties did not appear before the Commission, even after the receipt of notice, their names were called in open court and they were set ex-parte. Later on, 1st opposite party filed IA 274/22 to set aside the ex-parte order. It was dismissed on the ground that this Commission has no authority to set aside an order setting the opposite party ex-parte.
3. The following points arise for consideration in this case.
1. Whether the complainant had successfully proved that he made
double payments towards the purchase of the product?
2. If yes, whether there is Deficiency in service on the part of the
opposite parties in not re-funding the excess amount paid by the
complainant?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
4. Reliefs, as to cost and compensation.
4. Complainant filed proof affidavit in evidence and Exhibit A1 to A10 marked from his side and produced Section. 65.B certification under the Indian Evidence Act. Evidence closed, heard the complainant and taken for orders. Later it was reopened suo moto and the complainant was directed to file statement of account pertaining to relevant period to ascertain whether payment was effected. Complainant submitted 3 documents.
5. Point No.1
Complaint averment is that the complaint ordered a Mixer Grinder by brand name “Butterfly Jet Mixer Grinder” through the 1st opposite party’s online platform on 13.08.2022. Even though the complainant selected cash on delivery as the mode of payment, he was requested to change the payment through bank option due to Covid-19 pandemic. The product was delivered to the complainant on 17.08.2021 at 4.30 P.M. The complainant tried to make the payment through SBI credit card, but the payment could not be effected through Amazone link and he got the message of failed transaction in his mobile. So the delivery agent insisted to make cash payment and he gave Rs. 3210/- by cash and returned balance Rs.1. Exhibit A5 shows that “the order was fulfilled to the address provide the customer and the item was delivered on 17the August 2021.” Exhibit A7 shows the details of payment in the website of Amazon.in. As per Exhibit A7 the amount of Rs. 3209/- was given to Amazone (1st opposite party) by ‘ Pay on delivery’ mode and they paid the balance 1Rs. Exhibit A9 is the Tax invoice of Rs. 3209/- raised towards the purchase.
6. Complainant contended that after one hour of delivery of the item, he got a message that Rs. 3209/- debited from his SBI card. Exhibit A8 is the transaction details of the complainant through SBI card from 12.08.2021 to 08.09.2021. Exhibit A8 shows the payment of Rs. 3209/- to Amazone on 17th August 2021 through SBI Card. This shows that the complainant had made 2 payments towards the purchase of the product, cash on delivery and payment through SBI cards. The complainant had successfully proved that he made double payments and point No.1 decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No.2 to 4
7. Complainant’s grievance is that when he realized about the double payment, he approached the 1st opposite party for remedy. The 1st opposite party assured to refund the excess amount paid by the complainant to his SBI credit card. As nothing happened even after one week, he approached both opposite parties for resolving the issue. As per the opposite parties instruction, he had raised two complaints on 25.05.2021(by clerical mistake) it is 25.08.2021 and second one on 10.09.2021. The Bank’s stand with reference to his complainant No. 11296815343708 dated 10.09.2021 was that their merchant bank confirmed the payment and its proof is given to the seller.
Exhibit A6 dated 14.10.2021 showing the reply of the bank confirms complainant’s contention. It is stated “We would like to inform you that we had taken up the matter with the merchant bank to process credit for the said transaction. In response to which the merchant bank had provided us with a copy of the charge slip/documents for Rs.3209 which is attached for your reference. Since valid documents received from merchant, we are closing the dispute at our end.”
So the bank’s stand is that they are closing the complaint as they got confirmation from the merchant bank.
8. Exhibit A2, the e-mail communication from Amazon to the complainant dated 13th October 2021 confirms that the complainant had done a payment of Rs. 3209/- by cash on delivery and not by banking method. Further Exhibit A1, e-mail from the customer service of 1st opposite party dated 2nd November 2021 states that “Rs. 3209 dated reverted back against the pay link transaction” vide Tracking ID 265405711382 to the SBI credit card ending with xxx xxx 4119.
9. So the 1st opposite party confirms that the mode of payment by the complainant was cash on delivery and they had refunded the excess amount paid by him to his master card. But the complainant’s grievance is that he did not get the money and the amount is still pending with either opposite parties. Complainant produced his SBI card statements of account for the period from September 2021 to December 2021. From these it is seen that the 1st opposite party, Amazon has not refunded the amount as claimed by them.
10. Since both the opposite parties remained ex parte, the evidence adduced by the complainant stands unchallenged.
11. Eventhough it may be due to some technical fault, the first opposite party is liable to find out and solve the issue. It is a Deficiency in service on their part. The complainant is definitely suffering mental agony because of this. The 1st opposite party is responsible for this and they have to compensate the complainant for that. Further it caused additional financial burden and inconvenience in filing the complaint.
Since the 2nd opposite party has no role in refunding the amount, they
are exonerated from liability.
12. Considering all these facts, we allow the complaint. We direct the 1st opposite party.
1. To refund Rs. 3209, being excess amount paid by the complainant
together with interest at the rate of 9% from 17.08.21 till payment and.
2. To pay Rs. 7500/- as compensation for for their Deficiency in service, Rs.5000/- for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and Rs.2500/-as cost of the litigation.
The opposite party shall comply with the order within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which the opposite party shall pay an amount of Rs. 250/- per month or part thereof to the complainant till date of final payment.
Pronounced in open court on this the 28th day of November 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President
Sd/-
Vidya.A
Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K.
Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant
Ext.A1 - Copy of e-mail communication from Amazone customer Care
dated.02.11.2021
Ext.A2 - Copy of message from Amazone customer Care.
Ext.A3 - Copy of transaction information.
Ext. A4 – Copy of Amazone goods transaction chart.
Ext. A5 - E-mail from Amzone.in
Ext. A6 – Copy of e-mail send by SBI credit Card dated .14.10.21.
Ext. A7 - Copy of details of transaction with the first opposite party.
Ext. A8 – Copy of SBI Credit Card Bank Statement.
Ext. A9 – Copy of Amazon invoice.
Ext. A10 - Copy of Amazon order receipt.
Documents marked from the side of Opposite parties - Nil
Witness examined from the side of Complainant - Nil
Witness examined from the side of Opposite parties - Nil
Cost : 2500/-(Two thousand five hundred only)
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the
proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection
(Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they be
weeded out.
