CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII

DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN

CASE NO.CC/474/22

          Date of Institution:-    20.01.2023  

       Order Reserved on:-   05.09.2025

               Date of Decision:-      11.09.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mrs. Shashi Hooda

W/o Sh Deepak Hooda

R/o Sector-17 4^th Floor,

Plot No.60 Pocket-B, Dwarka

New Delhi - 110078

                                                                                                                                                                                       .….. Complainant

VERSUS

Alone Saree

Having it's registered off at:

125, Yogi Arced, Near Pramuk

Chaya Surat Gujrat - 395010                               

.…..Opposite Party

Per Dr. Harshali Kaur, Member

1. The complainant browsed the OP webpage and placed an order for a lady's suit vide order no.8854 on 06.08.2021 for Rs.1850/-. The complainant paid the amount to the OP via an online payment gateway and was issued an invoice (Annexure-A).

2. On receiving the order, the complainant raised a request for the return of the product, finding it unsatisfactory and facing a fitting issue. The OP accepted the return request, and the complainant dispatched the suit/product to the OP on 01.09.2021 via Trackon Courier Service vide consignment No.1423271597 (Annexure-B). The OP received the package on 09.09.2021 with the returned product.

3. Despite several reminders, the OP did not initiate a refund of the amount paid by the complainant nor exchange the product purchased by the complainant from the OP. Thus, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 23.09.2022 to the OP (Annexure-C) to no avail.

4. Aggrieved by the lackadaisical attitude of the OP, the complainant filed the present Complaint before this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. She has prayed for directions to the OP to pay Rs.1850/- with interest @18% p.a., Rs.2 lakh towards mental agony and pain caused to her along with future interest @18% p.a. and Rs.21,000/- towards litigation expenses.

5. Notice was issued to the OP to file their reply. However, when the complainant filed the proof of adequate service, the OP was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 14.04.2023. The complainant filed her affidavit in evidence and written arguments. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the complainant alone as OP is ex-parte.

6. We have carefully reviewed the facts and circumstances of the present Complaint and have perused the documents filed by the complainant to corroborate her sworn testimony. She has filed on record the copy of the WhatsApp chat exchange between her and the OPto show that the OP assured the complainant to return the suit that the complainant had ordered and found a fitting issue with and promised to exchange the same on 21.08.2021.

7. Believing in the OP's assurances, the complainant sent the purchased product on 09.09.2021 via courier service. The copy of the receipt has been annexed on record by the complainant on pages No.17 & 18 of her Complaint. The OP assured her of a refund on 27.09.2021 after receiving the notice sent by the complainant and also asked the complainant to share her UPI details. The complainant, however, preferred to come before this Commission to seek redressal of her Complaint.

8. Since the OP is ex-parte, we have no reason to disbelieve the complainant's unrebutted and uncontroverted testimony, which she has substantiated with documentary evidence. Hence, allowing the present Complaint, we direct the OP to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs.7500/- to the complainant towards compensationinclusive of litigation costs.

• A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
• File be consigned to record room.
• Announced in the open court on 11.09.2024.