Punjab

Jalandhar

CC/435/2018

Rajat Chopra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Best Price Modern Wholesale Store - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Jatinder Sharma

22 Dec 2020

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Ladowali Road, District Administrative Complex,
2nd Floor, Room No - 217
JALANDHAR
(PUNJAB)
 
Complaint Case No. CC/435/2018
( Date of Filing : 16 Oct 2018 )
 
1. Rajat Chopra
S/o Sh. Pawan Chopra R/o NB 66 Lakshmi Pura, Age 31 Years.
Jalandhar
PUNJAB
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Best Price Modern Wholesale Store
A Walmart, through its Manager/Representative/Owner Partner. Office at Near Hotel Grand Majestic, Near Rama Mandi, Jalandhar.
JALANDHAR
PUNJAB
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  Kuljit Singh PRESIDENT
  Jyotsna MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
Sh. Jatinder Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
......for the Complainant
 
Sh. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the OP.
......for the Opp. Party
Dated : 22 Dec 2020
Final Order / Judgement

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.435 of 2018

      Date of Instt. 16.10.2018

      Date of Decision: 22.12.2020

Rajat Chopra S/o Sh. Pawan Chopra R/o NB266 Lakshmi Pura, Jalandhar Age 31 years.

..........Complainant

Versus

Best Price Modern Wholesale Store, A walmart, through its Manager/Representative/Owner/Partner, Office at Near Hotel Grand Majestic, Near Rama Mandi, Jalandhar.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before:        Sh. Kuljit Singh             (President)

Smt. Jyotsna                   (Member)

 

Present:       Sh. Jatinder Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Sh. Rohit Sharma, Adv. Counsel for the OP.

Order

Kuljit Singh (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant is a consumer and OP is deals in selling of household and other goods at whole sale price. That on 01.09.2018 complainant received a mail from the OP in order to promote their mobile application for shopping and complainant installed the mobile application and place the order i.e. home grocery as per the need of the complainant with the order No.1875458 dated 01.09.2018 amounting to Rs.5170.37/-. Order confirmation mail is Ex.C1 & Ex.C2. That on 02.09.2018 representative of the OP came to the house of the complainant, but it was the incomplete order and representative of the OP took back the whole order then after few days again representative of the OP came to the complainant and delivered the partial order amounting to Rs.4575.70/-, Copy of the bill is Ex.C3 and complainant said he paid more than the invoice amount then representative of the OP said remaining amount will be credited to your bank account within 7 days, regarding this complainant called many time to customer care executive of the OP, but no fruitful result was given by the OP. That OP is getting undue benefit from the complainant and using the complainant money from last so many days. OP is having no right to charge extra from the customer. That this forum will fixes this lacuna and set an example for this type of stores not to repeat such type of practice again. That the OP indulged in this unfair trade practice and mal practices as OP, but taking excess amount and delivering incomplete order and as such, the present complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay compensation of Rs.70,000/- for harassment and mental agony to the complainant and further directed to pay Rs.11,000/- as legal fee and also refund of the excess amount paid Rs.594.67/-.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared through its counsel and filed written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is untenable in law and is liable to be dismissed by this Forum at the threshold. The complainant has failed to disclose how he is a consumer as defined u/s 2(d) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, which is as follows:-

          (d) “Consumer” means any person who

          (i)      buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or              promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any               system of deferred payment and includes any user of such             goods other than the person who buys such goods for                       consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly                              promised, or under any system of deferred payment when                   such use is made with the approval of such person, but                       does not include a person who obtains such goods for                       resale or for any commercial purpose.”

                   It is further alleged that OP is in the business of selling to other business and not to customers for their personal use. The terms and conditions as mentioned in the membership form, read and signed by any business becoming a member of the store clearly state that good sold to registered business members are exclusively for commercial purposes an/or for further sale to the end consumer. As part of the registration process, the member undertakes to use the product purchased from the Store for commercial purposes and not for any personal use. Therefore, the complainant does not fall within the definition of a Consumer as defined under Section 2(1) (d) of the Act. On merits, all the allegations as made by the complainant are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied those of the written statement.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective documents.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file very carefully.

6.                Precisely, the case of the complainant is that on 01.09.2018 complainant received a mail from the OP in order to promote their mobile application for shopping and complainant installed the same and placed the order i.e. home grocery as per his need with order No.1875458 dated 01.09.2018 amounting to Rs.5170.37/-. Order confirmation mail is Ex.C1 & Ex.C2. Then on 02.09.2018 representative of the OP came to the house of the complainant, but it was the incomplete order and representative of the OP took back the whole order then after few days again representative of the OP came to the complainant and delivered the partial order amounting to Rs.4575.70/-, Copy of the bill is Ex.C3, but according to the complainant, he paid more than the invoice amount then representative of the OP said remaining amount will be credited to his bank account within 7 days, but till today the remaining amount not credited in the complainant’s account and as such, the present complaint filed.

7.                On the other hand, the OP clearly stated in his reply in Para No.1 On Merits, that OP is a wholesale store and caters to only registered business owners, who purchase from OP for resale/commercial use and not for personal use. The said condition is made absolutely clear to the members at the time of registration with OP. The members are required to fill out a membership form which stipulates terms and conditions of being members of OP. The complainant is an add-on card member at the store and is bound by the same terms and conditions as the primary member. Copy of the signed membership form is Ex.OP-2. Also the order of the complainant was met with as per the availability of the items with the OP on 02.09.2018 and the delivery was made to the complainant to the tune of Rs.4575.70/-. The difference in the amount was informed that the difference will be credited back to the same source from where the payment was made. The remaining amount of Rs.594.67/- was refunded to the complainant on 03.09.2018 through bank reference No.WAP_1074270138362443426941, copy of the same is Ex.OP-3, but this fact has been concealed by the complainant.

8.                After considering the facts of the complaint and reply as well as documents submitted by both the parties, it is clear that the refund of Rs.594.67/- has already been made by OP to the complainant and nothing has been due towards the OP and as such, we came to conclusion that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work. 

9.               Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

 

Dated                                       Jyotsna                           Kuljit Singh

22.12.2020                              Member                          President

 
 
[ Kuljit Singh]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ Jyotsna]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.