Orissa

Cuttak

CC/148/2021

Debasish Nanda ,Proprietor, M/s Dev Mobile Shop - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Head,Amazon office - Opp.Party(s)

S K Jena

10 Aug 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                                C.C.No.148/2021

Debasish Nanda,

S/O:Akshaya Kumar Nanda,

Permanent resident of Vill:Shyamsundarpur,

P.O:Purusottampur,PS:Kendrapada Sadar,

Dist:Kendrapada,Pin-754211.

 

At present:Proprietor of M/s. DEV Mobile Shop,

At:Kaktia,P.O:Asureswar,P.S:Mahanga,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                ... Complainant.

             

                                                Vrs.

1.         The Branch Head of AMAZON OFFICE,

At:Garapur(Near Royal Garden Palace),

P.O:Kapaleswar,P.S:Kendrapada Sadar,

Dist:Kendrapada.

 

2.        AMAZON TRANSPORTATION SERVICE PVT. LTD.

Block-D, Sector-A,Mancheswar Industrial Estate,

Bhubaneswar,Khurda,Odisha,Pin-751001.

 

3.       AMAZON India Registered Office

Brigade Gateway,8^th Floor,

26/1,Dr. Rajkumar Road,

Malleshwaram(W),Bangalore-560055.

Karnatak,India.                                                                 ...Opp. Parties.

 

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    16.09.2021

Date of Order:  10.08.2022

 

For the complainant:            Mr. S.K.Jena,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps               :                   None .

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                                                          

            Case of the complainant in nutshell is that he had placed order through the O.Ps for purchasing a Camera on 8.8.2021 for a price of Rs.17,040/-.  But to his dismay, on 13.8.21 when he received the packet and opened the sealed pack before the agent of the O.Ps, he found two number of BOCA sparkling water bottles of which he had taken photographs and had immediately reported the matter to the O.Ps.  Inspite of repeated persuasions, when the matter could not be settled, the complainant had to file this case seeking direction to the O.Ps to compensate him towards his financial loss and mental agony.  The complainant has thus claimed the price paid by him to the tune of Rs.17,040/-, a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards his mental agony, a sum of Rs.2000/- towards his correspondence expenses and a sum of Rs.5000/- towards his litigation expenses; from the O.Ps.

            The complainant has filed xerox copies of the item indented, item delivered and the correspondences thereto in order to substantiate his case.

2.         On the other hand, the O.Ps having not contested this case were set exparte vide order dt.24.4.2022.

3.         The points for determination in this case are as follows:

            i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether the O.Ps were deficient in their services towards the complainant of this case.

            iii.        Whether the O.Ps in this case had practised unfair trade?

            iv.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed?

Points no.2 & 3.

            Points no.2 & 3 being the two important points are taken up together first for consideration here in this case.  On perusal of the averments of the complaint petition and also on perusal of the copies of the documents as submitted by the complainant alongwith his complaint petition, this Commission unhesitatingly comes to a conclusion that the O.Ps are undoubtedly at fault of being deficient in their service, they had practised unfair trade by not providing the order as placed by the complainant and subsequently, by not rectifying the defect  and accordingly these two important points go against the O.Ps of this case.

Points no.1 & 4.

            When the order placed by the complainant was not given to him and in lieu of that something else was delivered which the complainant had verified in presence of the agent of the O.Ps and had taken photographs of it. By not rectifying the said defect, the case filed by the complainant against the O.Ps is definitely maintainable and the complainant is of course entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him in this case.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is decreed exparte against all the three O.Ps who are found to be jointly and severally liable here in this case.  The O.Ps are thus directed to pay the price of Rs.17,040/- as paid by the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from 8.8.21 till the final payment is made.  The O.Ps are also directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- towards his mental agony, a sum of Rs.2000/- towards his correspondence expenses and a sum of Rs.5000/- towards the litigation cost of the complainant.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 10^th day of August,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                    Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                               President

                                                                                                                                                              Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                 Member