Haryana

Ambala

CC/1/2023

BALKAR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMIT JAIN. - Opp.Party(s)

GOPAL.

18 Mar 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	01 of 2023
Date of Institution	:	02.01.2023
Date of decision	:	18.03.2024

Balkar S/o Sh. Raj Kumar, aged about 25 years, R/o H.No.45, Golden Park, Mahesh Nagar, Ambala Cantt. Distt. Ambala (Haryana).

……. Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Amit Jain, C/o 12/13, Mahesh Nagar, Near Pandit Ji ka Dhaba, Ambala Cantt.
2. JioMart, Office Address: 3rd Floor, Court House, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai-400002 Through authorized signatory
3. DMI Finance Pvt. Ltd. C/o: Express Building, 9-10, 3rd floог, Bahuadur Saha Zafar Marg, New Delhi. Through authorized signatory.
4. HDFC Bank Ltd., Branch, SCO-844, NAC, Manimajra, Chandigarh Through Branch Manager.

….….  Opposite Parties

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                      Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:-     Shri Gopal, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                    OP No.1 already ex parte.

                   Shri Ram Kumar Grewal, Advocate, counsel for OP No.2.

                   Shri Rajiv Sachdeva, Advocate, counsel for OP No.3.

                   Shri Sandeep Bakshi, Advocate, counsel for OP No.4.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                    Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) and prayed that:-

1. OP No.3 be directed to refund the amount to the complainant that has been received by it in shape of installment illegally i.e. Rs. 33900/- with cost.
2. OP No.4 be directed to get back the penalty that has been imposed by it due to bouncing of installment i.e. Rs.15000/- and to get corrected the CIBIL Score of the complainant.
3. OPs be directed to pay Rs.4,00,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment caused to him and Rs.21000/- as litigation expenses.
4. Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that OP no. 1 is running his shop under name and style i.e. Move N Pick and deals in electronic items i.e. Mobiles, Air conditioners, washing Machine, LED TV etc. at above mentioned address and  OP no. 2 is dealing in the business of online selling of goods and running its website JIOMart.com and also running mobile app. and other social media platforms. OP no. 3 is a finance company and the complainant is having saving bank account with the OP no. 4 i.e. saving bank account no. 50100395902947. The complainant wanted to purchase an Air Conditioner therefore, on 15.06.2022 he ordered AC i.e. HITACHI RSNS317HEEA, for an amount of Rs. 33,990/- through online from OP  no. 2. He got the said AC financed from OP No.3 under which he was liable to pay installments of Rs. 56656/- each for 6 months and the said AC was hypothecated with OP  no. 3. On 17.06.2022 the said order was cancelled by the complainant before delivery of the said AC but even after cancellation of the said order, OP no.3 has been deducting installment from the bank account of the complainant illegally. The complainant contacted OP no.1 on 19.08.2022 and requested to inform the OP No.3 that the said order has been cancelled by complainant and not to deduct the installment from the account of the complainant and refund the amount which has been deducted by  OP  no. 3 from the bank account of the complainant but to no avail. Therefore, on 20.10.2022 the complainant served legal notice to OPs No.1 to 3 through his counsel but to no avail.  Even OP No.4 also did not stop deducting EMIs from the account of the complainant and imposed penalty, as a result of which his CIBIL Score has been affected. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of the OP before this Commission, therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 28.02.2023.
4.           Upon notice, OP No.2 appeared and filed written version wherein it raised preliminary objections to the effect that the present complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be out-rightly dismissed; the contents of the complaint are wholly misconceived, vexatious, misleading, misrepresented, unsustainable, false, and frivolous, and are nothing but blatant abuse of the process of law etc. On merits, it has been stated that the complainant placed an order through  OP  No. 1 for a "Hitachi Air Conditioner" worth Rs. 33,990/- for which the shipment was created dated 15.06.2022 via the Shipment Id FY62A9BA6F0167A1BE92-01 and the status of the Order was "under process". Thereafter, he chose to make the payments on Installment basis. However, the complainant on 16.06.2022 raised Ticket No. #6553659562 for cancellation of the Order "Hitachi Air Conditioner" while simultaneously the order already reached the doorstep and same was cancelled from the end of the complainant as advised via call ticket. The product was picked up from the doorstep and brought back to OP No.2. Due to technical issues, the product on the database got updated as delivered. The complainant at a very crucial time/end moment cancelled the order which led to technical issues. OP No.2 serves a huge client base and such actions of accepting/cancelling orders are executed at the back end and since the cancellation was done at such an instance the status could not be updated due to a technical glitch. The amount of Rs.5,665/- was credited as the first installment in the month of October 2022, and the very same was refunded in the account of the complainant on 16.11.2022 vide  KKBK223206779641, Payment Details DM10022630858- 5665. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OP No.2 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
5.           Upon notice, OP No.3 appeared and filed written version wherein it raised preliminary objections to the effect that the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts; the present complaint is not maintainable; this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint; there is no deficiency of service or negligence on the part of the OP No.3 etc. On merits, it has been stated that  the complainant had purchased the AC in question from OP No.2 through vendor i.e.,  OP  No. 1 and availed  loan from the  OP  No. 3 vide Loan ID DM10022630858, under which he was required to repay the amount of Rs.33,990/- as Rs.5,665/- per month for a period of 6 months. The complainant has taken said loan facility, whereby, payment via e-mandate has been agreed by him for repayment of said loan amount, whereas, the same provides authority to OP No.3 to debit the monthly EMI from his account bearing A/c No. 50100395902947 and credit the same into said loan account on a due date i.e., 5th date of every Month for a tenure of 6 months. The complainant has cancelled order of the said Air Conditioner, however, no intimation was provided to the  OP  No. 3, therefore, OP No.3 has presented for payment of instalments/EMI from the account of the complainant under e-mandate procedure on 05-07- 2022, 05-08-2022, 05-09-2022 and 05-10-2022. The EMI's of the complainant were bounced on 05- 07-2022, 05-08-2022 and 05-09-2022 and no amount was deducted from the account of the complainant by the OP No.3. OP No.3 has presented for payment of installments/EMI from the saving bank account of the complainant under e-mandate procedure on 05-10- 2022 and the same had been honoured and the OP no.3 received payment of instalments/EMI amounting Rs.5,665/-, however, thereafter, the  OP  No. 3 came to know about the cancellation of the Loan facility and that order of the said Air Conditioner has been cancelled by the complainant. Consequently, OP  No. 3 then immediately processed refund of  Rs.5,665/- and the same was received by the complainant on 16.11.2022 and also got corrected the CIBIL report of the complainant before filing of the present complaint. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OP No.3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with exemplary cost.
6.           Upon notice, OP No.4 appeared and filed written version wherein it raised preliminary objections to the effect that this complaint is not maintainable; there is no cause of action for filing this complaint; this complaint is abuse of the process of law; the complainant does not qualify the ingredients of a valid complaint as there is neither any deficiency in service nor unfair trade practice on the party of the OP No.4 etc. On merits, it has been stated that the complainant on 15.06.2022 initiated E-Mandate from his bank account bearing no.50100395902947 for an amount of Rs.33,990/- in favour of OP no.3 for installment of Rs.5665 x 6= Rs.33,990/- . However, because there was no account balance in his account therefore, all the ACH e-Mandates were dishonored, hence, not even a single installment of the said mandate has been honored and debited to the bank account of the complainant. As per rules the bank was entitled to charge the ACH e-Mandate on each dishonored mandate totalling to Rs.34953.67ps. ACH e- Mandate System Facilitates hassle free registration of Standing Instructions by customer through alternates modes to paper- based mandates. ACH e-Mandate can be created for repayment of Mandate amount through electronic mode using net banking/debit card for timely EMI repayment but however, if the client wants to cancel the Mandate, needs to submit physical request at branch. In the present case, the complainant has never submitted the physical request for cancellation of the said mandate, therefore, it could not be cancelled. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OP No.4 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with heavy costs.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW1A, alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-6 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. Learned counsel for OP No.2 tendered affidavit of Chirdeep Gupta, Grievance Officer of OP No.2-JioMart, website managed and operated by Reliance Digital Limited, i.e OP No.2 as Annexure OP-2/A alongwith documents Annexure OP-2/1 to OP-2/3 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.2. Learned counsel for OP No.3 tendered affidavit of Saurav Baveja, Authorized Signatory of OP No.3-DMI Finance Pvt. Ltd. as Annexure OP3/A alongwith documents- Annexure OP-3/1 to OP-3/2 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.3. Learned counsel for OP No.4 tendered affidavit of Ms.Sanjana Arora, Branch Manager of OP No.4-HDFC Bank Limited, SCO No.850, NAC, Manimajra as Annexure OP No.4/A and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.4.
8.           We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and learned counsel for the OPs No.2 to 4 and have also carefully gone through the case file.
9.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that by deducting EMIs from his account, despite the fact that he had cancelled the order qua AC in question, well in advance, the OPs have indulged into unfair trade practice and are also deficient in providing service.
10.           On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No.2 while reiterating its objections raised in its written version submitted that the complainant on 16.06.2022 raised a ticket via call Ticket No. #6553659562 for cancellation of the Order "Hitachi Air Conditioner" while simultaneously the order already reached the doorstep and same was canceled from the end of the complainant as advised via call ticket. He further submitted that the product was picked up from the doorstep and brought back to OP No.2 but due to technical issues, the product on the database got updated as delivered. He further submitted that the amount of Rs.5,665/- was credited as the first installment in the month of October 2022, and the same was refunded in the account of the complainant on 16.11.2022 vide  KKBK223206779641, Payment Details DM10022630858- 5665.
11.           Learned counsel for OP No.3 while reiterating its objections raised in its written version submitted that  the complainant has cancelled order of the said Air Conditioner, however, no intimation was provided to the  OP  No. 3, therefore, OP No.3 has presented for payment of installments/EMI from the account of the complainant under e-mandate procedure on 05-07- 2022, 05-08-2022, 05-09-2022 and 05-10-2022. He further submitted that the EMI's of the complainant were bounced on 05- 07-2022, 05-08-2022 and 05-09-2022 and no amount was  deducted from the account of the complainant by OP  No. 3. He further submitted that amount of Rs.5665/- received by OP No.3 stood refunded to the complainant on  16.11.2022 and OP No.3 also got corrected the CIBIL report of the complainant before filing of the present complaint.
12.           Learned counsel for OP No.4 while reiterating its objections raised in its written version submitted that the complainant on 15.06.2022 initiated E-Mandate from his bank account bearing no.50100395902947 for an amount of Rs.33,990/- in favour of OP no.3 for installment of Rs.5665 x 6 =Rs.33,990/- but because there was no account balance in his account therefore, all the ACH e-Mandates were dishonored, hence, not even a single installment of the said mandate has been honored and debited to the bank account of the complainant. He further submitted that as per rules the bank was entitled to charge the ACH e-Mandate on each dishonored mandate totalling to Rs.34953.67ps. He further submitted that in the present case, the complainant has never submitted the physical request for cancellation of the said mandate, therefore, it could not be cancelled.
13.           It may be stated here that it is not in dispute that on 15.06.2022 the complainant had ordered the AC in question with OP No.2, online, which was hypothecated with OP No.3. It is also not in dispute that the total price of the said AC was Rs.33990/- which was payable by the complainant in 6 monthly installment of Rs.5665/- each. It is also an admitted fact that on 16.06.2022 itself, the said order of AC stood cancelled by the complainant and there is nothing on record that on that date the AC had been delivered to the complainant. Because it is the case of the complainant that the OP No.3 kept on  deducting the EMIs from his bank account maintained by OP No.4 despite the fact that the order of AC stood cancelled, therefore the moot question which falls for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief or not. It is significant to mention here that though the complainant has sought refund of amount of Rs.33990/- in his prayer clause on the ground that the said amount had been deducted from his bank account, yet, when we go through the record of the case, it is established from the statement of account, Annexure C-2 that only one installment of Rs.5665/- stood deducted by the OPs from his account and that too on 05.10.2022. As far as deduction of remaining installments before this date are concerned, it is found from this statement of account, Annexure C-2 that there was no account balance in his account, therefore, all the installments/ACH e-mandates were dishonoured, as a result of which penalty charges to that extent were levied by OP No.4. 
14.           It may be stated here that it has been candidly admitted by OP No.2 in its written version that though the complainant had raised cancellation order on 16.06.2022, yet, due to technical issues, the AC in question on the database got updated as delivered.  Whatever reason may be, there is nothing on record that the complainant gave any request to OP No.4 of OP No.3 for cancellation of the ACH e-mandate, as a result of which, the ACH e-mandates were dishonoured which attracted penal charges, referred to above. Irrespective of above fact, it is the definite case of OP No.2 that one installment of Rs.5665/- which stood deducted from the account of the complainant on 05.10.2022 has been refunded to him on 16.11.2022 vide UTR NO.KKBK223206779641. This fact has not been disputed by the complainant. The complainant has failed to place on record any evidence to prove that the amount of Rs.33990/- has been paid by him to the OPs. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that only an amount of Rs.5665/- stood received by OP No.2 from the complainant on 05.10.2022, through ACH-e-mandate, which also stood refunded to him on 16.11.2022. As such, the complainant is not entitled to get any other amount from the OPs. 
15.           For the reasons recorded above, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules. File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced:- 18.03.2024

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President