MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…                        The fact of case is that, the complainant being allured with attractive advertisement on TV & other media had procured a Sony Microvault Classic Flash Pendrive-16 GB from the above OP bearing its Order Id No. 994731781, on dt.06.06.2016 for Rs.578/- and the money was paid by the complainant through his debit card. It is pertinent that when the complainant place order for the item, the MRP was 1060/- out of which 49% discount allowed by the OP. But after delivery of the product, the complainant found that the actual MRP of the set was just Rs.390/- which was too different then the web and TV presentation price. It is pertinent that though the order was placed with the OP but the product was provided by one Suman Enterprises, 329, Sant Nagar, New Delhi, vide his invoice no.SUMA/16/17/04266 dt.07.06.2016. He further alleged that, the OP provide him a defective product for a good price which is unfair and deficiency in service and against the principles of contract of sale. Hence the complainant inflicted mental agony, and financial losses due to the actions of OP. So he prayed before the Forum to direct the OP.s to pay the price of alleged product and a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation and cost for such unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OP.

2.         The counsel for OP entered his appearance and filed counter in the case and averred nothing except unwarranted descriptions along with sworn affidavit. The complainant has filed copy of two documents. The counsel for OP and complainant together has been minutely heard the case and perused the record.

3.         In awarding compensation the forum has to look several aspects to meet the ends of justice. As per Sec.14(i)(d) compensation can be awarded to a consumer only in respect of loss or injury suffered by the consumer due to the negligence of the opp. Parties and proof of loss or injury to the complainant in a sine qua non for considering award of compensation. It should take realistic & pragmatic views considering to quantify the damages rationally. As per settled principles of law, mere assumption without any solid back ground or evidence is totally ingress to the laws of jurisprudence.

4.         In the instant case, the complainant could neither explain us from what source he has paid for the product or when the product is working well to expectations, how could he suffered loss or damage.

5.         Error of omissions or commissions may encrypt into any transaction when the company has charged more than the MRP of the product, illusioned the customer of providing discounts, is unfair mere reimburse of the excess then the MRP would not dilute the obligation of providing fair service to consumers, and as thus the OP should reimburse further 49% of the MRP of the product i.e. Rs.195/-.

6.         However, we assume, that though this unfair, has led the complainant to file this petition, which otherwise inflicted certain costs, hence he is entitled for the reimbursement of the cost.

            Hence its ordered,

                                                      ORDER

i.          The OP shall pay the complainant Rs.195/- (Rupees One hundred Ninety five) i.e. the 49% discount of the original price as advertised in the web platform of OP, inter alia, Rs.500/-(Rupees Five hundred) as cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 16th day of Nov' 2016.

      Sd/-                                                              Sd/-

MEMBER                                             PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                   NABARANGPUR.

Date of Preparation:

Date of dispatch      :  

Date of received by                                                           

the A/A for Ops / Complainant  :

Initial of the dispatcher.