Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/176

NavkiranJit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ebay India Pvt. Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Gurpreet Singh Chauhan

25 Mar 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

C. C. No. :                  176 of 2018

Date of Institution :         2.11.2018

Date of Decision :         25.03.2019

Navkiran jit Singh aged 30 years, son of Charanjit Singh r/o Street No. 6, New Harindera Nagar, Faridkot Tehsil and District Faridkot.

.....Complainant

Versus

1. Ebay India Pvt Ltd, 14^th Floor, Naresh Block, R-Tech Park, Western Express Highway, Goregoan (East), Mumbai-400063 through its MD.
2. Mintkart India Pvt Ltd No.1261, 6^th Floor, Building No.12, Solitaire Corporate Park No. 167, Guru Hargobind Ji Marg, Andher East, Mumbai-400093 through its MD.
3. Farooq Ali 17-8-533/55, Chanchal Guda, Bagh-E-Jaharan, Hyderabad-500024.

........OPs

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:  Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

                 Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Sh Gurpreet  Singh  Chauhan, Ld Counsel for Complainant,

              OPs Exparte.

 

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to

cc no. -176 of 2018

OPs to replace the defective Memory Card with new one or to refund the cost of memory card and for further directing OPs to pay Rs.20,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental tension suffered by complainant alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.

2                                              Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant purchased one Lexar Professional Compact Flash Memory Card through OP-3 online seller by visiting the website of OP-1 and OP-2 for Rs.4,999/-on 17.11.2017.  Before making purchase of same, complainant contacted OP-3, who assured about the quality of said memory card and also gave one year warrantee against any kind of defect in it, but just after the purchase, memory card in question started giving trouble as it did not work properly. Complainant contacted OPs but they kept putting him off on one pretext or the other. Complainant sent e-mails to OP-1 on 24.12.2017 and on 2.01.2018, but all in vain. After that complainant contacted OPs on their helpline no.18002093229 and got registered his complaint vide complaint no.150172683447, but they did not bother to give any reply. Legal notice issued by complainant to OPs through his counsel on 9.07.2018 also served no purpose. Product sold by OPs has inherent manufacturing defect and act of OPs in not paying heed to his genuine requests for replacement of memory card, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. He has prayed for directing OPs to replace the said memory card or to refund its cost price and to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. Hence, the present complaint.

 

cc no. -176 of 2018

3                                                    Ld counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 6.11.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                                       Notice issued to OPs through RC AD did not receive back in the office undelivered. Statutory period expired. Acknowledgment might have been lost in transit. Despite repeated calls, no body appeared in the Forum on date fixed on behalf of OPs either in person or through counsel to defend the case, and then, after long waiting till 4.00 pm, OPs were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.01.2019.

5                                                      Proper opportunities  were given to complainant to lead evidence to prove the pleadings. The ld counsel for complainant tendered in  exparte evidence,  affidavit of complainant as Ex C-1 and document Ex C-2 to 9 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                              As OPs are proceeded against exparte, therefore, there is no rebuttal from OPs side.

7                                                          We have heard learned counsel for complainant very carefully and have also thoroughly perused the affidavits & documents placed on the file by complainant party.

8                                                    Ld Counsel for complainant vehementally argued in exparte arguments that complainant purchased a Memory Card  from OP-3 through OP-1 and OP-2 / online seller. On assurance of OP-3,  about the quality of memory card, complainant purchase the memory card in question and at that time OP-3 also gave one year warrantee against any kind of defect in it, but just after the

cc no. -176 of 2018

purchase, memory card in question started giving trouble and gave four images of one photograph taken at a time. It did not work properly. Complainant contacted OPs but they kept putting him off on one pretext or the other. E-mails  sent by complainant to OP-1 on 24.12.2017 and on 2.01.2018, but all in vain. Complainant also contacted OPs on their helpline no.18002093229 and got registered his complaint vide complaint no.150172683447, but they did not give any reply. Legal notice issued by complainant to OPs on 9.07.2018 also served no purpose. Memory Card sold by OPs has some inherent manufacturing defect due to which it did not work properly. Requests made by complainant to OPs to replace the defective memory card have gone futile and act of OPs in not paying heed to his genuine requests for replacement of memory card, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint.

9                                              The case of complainant is that he purchased a memory card having one year warrantee from OP-3 through  website of OP-1 and 2 against proper bill through online system and just after its purchase and in pendency of warranty period, said memory card started giving trouble to complainant as it did not work properly and when complainant brought this fact to the notice of OPs through e-mails,  registered complaint and through legal notice, OPs did not give any satisfactory reply. Complainant made several requests to Ops to replace the said memory car or to refund the cost price of said memory card, but all in vain, which amounts to deficiency in service. To prove his case, complainant  has placed on record copy of bill Ex C-1. Copies of documents Ex C- to Ex C-4 are e-mails sent by complainant to OP-1 on dates 24.12.2017, 2.01.2018 and 30.01.2018 respectively wherein complainant has clearly mentioned his grievance that memory card sold by OPs is defective one and it did not give proper results.

 

cc no. -176 of 2018

Ex C-9 is copy of e-mail sent by Ops to complainant vide which they confirmed the delivery of said memory card to complainant. Through legal notice dated 9.07.2018, complainant has reiterated his pleadings through  affidavit Ex C-1. On the other hand, there is no rebuttal from Ops side as nobody appeared on behalf of OPs to contest the allegations levelled by complainant.

10                                       From the careful perusal of evidence and record placed on file, it is observed that complainant purchased the memory card in question from OPs and he is facing some problem in using the same due to some inherent defects. It did not give requisite results and was giving four images for one photograph.  Ex C-2 copy of invoice proves that complainant is the consumer of OPs.  It is observed that Ops are hand in gloves with each other as OP-1 and 2 are not only the facilitators, rather they are also promoting and provoking the public to purchase the products through their website. The product sold by Ops is of very low quality and it has inherent manufacturing defect and there is deficiency in service on the part of Ops in supplying such defective memory card to complainant. Ops have not come up to warranty provisions of product and have even failed to redress his grievance. Repeated requests made by complainant for replacement of memory card bore no fruit. This act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops and has caused harassment and mental tension to complainant.

11                                               In the light of above discussion and keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are fully convinced with the pleadings and evidence led by complainant and therefore, complaint  in hand is

cc no. -176 of 2018

hereby allowed. Ops are directed to replace the memory card in question with new one of same model within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in case of failure, to refund the cost price of Rs.4,999/- of said memory card. Ops are further directed to pay Rs.5000/-to complainant for harassment and mental agony suffered by him and Rs.2000/-as litigation expenses suffered by complainant. Compliance of this order be made within one month of date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum:

Dated: 25.03.2019

Member                          President                                          (Param Pal Kaur)            (Ajit Aggarwal)