Complaint No: 71 of 2023.

                                                    Date of Institution: 28.03.2023.

                                                            Date of order: 10.10.2023.

Munishwar Nagpal Son of Late Sh. Tek Chand Nagpal, Resident of Backside Bus Stand, Civil Lines, Gurdaspur. Pin Code – 143521.

                                                                                                                                                                               …....Complainant.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

                                                                              VERSUS

Apeksha International, Ground Floor, Khasra no. 1033, Right Portion, Village Mundka, Near Ganpati Dharamkanta Delhi, New Delhi - 21, Pin Code – 110041, website: www.bersache.com, through its Chief Executive Officer/ Manager.

                                                                                                                                                                                  .....Opposite Party.

                                              Complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Present: Complainant: In person.

             Opposite party: Exparte.            

Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President,  Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.

          Munishwar Nagpal, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against Apeksha International (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite party).

2.       Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant came across an advertisement on YouTube for selling of shoes and placed an online order for the purchase of one pair of shoes on 06.03.2023 of the above concern. It is submitted that on 06.03.2023, the Opposite Parties booked the order for supplying the shoe make Bersache Grand Sports Shoes for Men for running, walking, gym, tracking and hiking shoes (Grey-9022-7) (QRI 9022-7). It is further submitted that before placing the order for the purchase of the above mentioned shoes, the complainant went through all the terms and conditions of the same and in the terms and conditions, the column of Refund policy was mentioned alongwith the advertisement on the YouTube. It is pertinent to mention here that Mr. Vivek Oberoi is the Brand Ambassador of the above company who is a celebrity in Bollywood Industry. It is further submitted that the Opposite Party supplied the ordered pair of Shoes through Bluedart courier service on 09/10.03.2023 and the complainant made the payment of demanded amount of Rs.1499/- as price as the order for the supply of the shoe was Cash On delivery. It is further submitted that the complainant after receiving the above said parcel, opened the same and tried to wear the same. But found that the seven number (7) of shoe was tight and was not comfortable. It is alleged that on the next day, the complainant contacted the Opposite Party through their customer care number and told their officer that the shoe is tight and the complainant wants to send back the same shoe and also requested to refund the price and take the shoes back. But the Opposite Party straight away refused that they are not having any refund policy, they can only replace the shoe and can deliver the bigger size. It is further alleged that while going through the advertisement, the Opposite Party has particularly mentioned the refund policy in their terms and conditions under the above mentioned head. As per the verbal meaning, the refund policy, the Opposite Party is liable to refund the amount of Rs.1499/- to the complainant. It is further alleged that this act of the Opposite Party and as per the terms and conditions of their advertisement, this act is unfair trade practice and deficiency in services on their part. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite party the complainant has suffered loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. So, there is a clear cut deficiency in services on the part of the opposite party.

          On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and negligence in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.1499/- received from the complainant and the Opposite Party may kindly be burdened with Rs.10,000/- for causing physical harassment and metal agony to the complainant and the litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- may also be awarded in favour of the complainant, in the interest of justice.  

3.       Opposite party did not appear despite the service of notice and was proceeded against exparte vide order date 12.09.2023.

4.       Complainant has tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3.

5.       Written arguments not filed by the complainant.

6.       Complainant in person has argued that he had purchased men running shoes from the opposite party on 06.03.2023 but after receiving the shoes complainant found that opposite party had supplied were tight and shoes was not of good quality and accordingly complainant had made request for refund but opposite party refused to refund the amount  and rather insisted that as per refund policy only replacement is admissible as such it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

7.       Opposite party remained exparte vide order dated 12.09.2023.

8.       We have heard the complainant in person and gone through the record.

9.       To prove his case complainant has placed on record his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A, copy of invoice Ex.C1, copy of details of shoes Ex.C2 and copy of refund policy Ex.C3. The evidence brought on record by the complainant has remained unrebutted. We are of the view that since the opposite party supplied wrong shoes to the complainant which was tight and since the shoes supplied to the complainant was not as per the specifications ordered by the complainant and complainant was within his right to raise the refund from the opposite party and refusal of refund the price of the shoes amounts to deficiency in service.

10.     Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.1499/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. w.e.f. 06.03.2023 till realization. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to the complainant for mental tension, harassment and cost of litigation. Entire exercise shall be completed within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

11.      The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases.

12.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record room. 

                               (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

                                                                        President   

Announced:                                          (B.S.Matharu)

Oct. 10, 2023                                                Member

*YP*