District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No.657/2021.

 Date of Institution: 21.12.2021.

Date of Order: 19.12.2022.

Sh. Subodh Kansal, age – 32 years R/o 1524, Sector-7E, Faridabad, Haryana  - 121006.

Smt. Pritty Jain, age 31, W/o Sh. Subodh Kansal R/o 1524, Sector-7E, Faridabad, Haryana – 121006.

                                                                   …….Complainants……..

                                                Versus

Firangi Bake (Food Chains & Outlet), G.F.Rani Bhawan, A-8, Nehru Ground, New Industrial Town, Faridabad, Haryana.

Nandan Reddy, Shriharsha Majety & Rahul Jaimini (CEO, Directors, Partners) Bundl Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Swiggy.com) No.55 Sy NO. 8-14, Ground floor, I & J Block, Embassy Tech Village, Outer Ring Road, Devarbisanahalli, Bengaluru – 560103.

                                                                   …Opposite parties……

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Ms. Pritty Jain, complainant in person.

                             Sh.  Neeraj Gupta, counsel for opposite party No.1. (Sh. Saurabh Srivastava, AR on behalf of opposite party No.1)

                             Opposite party No.2 ex-parte vide order dated 02.03.2022.

ORDER:  

                             Today the case was fixed for arguments.

2.                          During the course of arguments,  Shri Saurabh Srivastav,

Designation Assistant Chief Dlight Officer has made a statement that “I apologies

the matter and ready to give some food vouchers/cash to the complainant worth of

Rs.5000/- as full and final settlement.

3.                          Ms. Pritty Jain, complainant in person has made a statement

that “we had conversation with opposite party No.1 that to apologies the matter in

written and compensate us for mental torture and agony but they denied to do the

same.”

4.                          On the basis of the statements of the parties  as well as without

going into the merit of the case, the Commission is of the opinion that there is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite party No. 2 has not come present to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite party NO.2 has rendered deficient services to the complainant.

5.                          Keeping in view of the above submissions,  the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite parties  Nos.1 & 2 to pay Rs.5000/- each in lumsump to the complainant.  There are no order as to costs.  Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.  Copy of this order be given to the parties  concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.

Announced on:  19.12.2022                                 (Amit Arora)

                                                                                  President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                    Redressal Commission, Faridabad.