DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

Hans Raj Singla, son of Sh.Prabhu Dayal, Resident of H.No.8,Street No.1-A/14, Guru Nanak Nagar, Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

Flipkart Internet Pvt. Limited, Vaishnavi Summit No.6/B, 7^th Main 80 Feet Road, 3^rd Block, Banglore-560034, Karnatka.

                                                                   …………Opposite Party

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Hon’ble Mr.S.K.Aggarwal, President

                                      Hon’ble Mr.G.S.Nagi, Member        

PRESENT:                   Sh.Hans Raj Singla, complainant in person

                             Sh.Puneet Gupta, counsel for opposite party.

 ORDER                                          

1. The instant complaint is filed by Hans Raj Singla (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Flipkart Internet Pvt. Limited (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act (for short the Act).
2. The averments of the complainant are as follows:

That on 5.6.2020, he placed an online order on the site of Flipkart .com company, for the purchase of BPL TV, for Rs.9999/-, which was delivered to him on 8.6.2020 and was to be installed till 13.6.2020.But the same was not installed till the said date. Complainant made repeated phone calls to OP but nothing was done. On 24.6.2020, the company through email intimated that “we are working on your request and will need additional time to resolve your concern as our system are currently upgrading. Rest assured, we will send you an up-date on your request in next 3 days i.e. upto 27.6.2020”.Time and again company sent this type of e-mail and vide e-mail dated 8.7.2020 installation and demo of BPL TV has been cancelled, which amounts to gross unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OP. It also caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant and his family. Consequently, prayer has been made for acceptance of the complaint.

3. Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and filed written statement having raised certain preliminary objections. It is pleaded that OP’s role / involvement of OP is an intermediary only, that is, to provide online platform to facilitate the whole transaction of sale and purchase of goods by the respective sells and buyers. As such OP is not involved in the entire transaction except for providing online platform and the contract of sale and purchase is between the independent seller and the buyer. The OP has not charged any amount of consideration from the complainant.
4. On merits, it is submitted that OP is not the seller/manufacturer of the product and the responsibility to provide any after sale service including installation of the product lies upon the seller of manufacturer of the product. It is admitted that product in question is purchased through the platform of OP being an intermediate and is not responsible for sale, warranty or installation related issues. It is averred that installation of the product had been delayed due to logistic constraints due to Govt. guidelines during covid period. There is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of the OP. After denying all other averments, OP prayed for dismissal of complaint.
5. To prove his case, complainant through his authorized representative has tendered in evidence his affidavit, Ex.CA alongwith documents Ex.C1 copy of bill, Ex.C2 copy of ordered TV delivered to complainant, Ex.C3 copy of SMS, Ex.C4 copy of e-mail dated 24.6.2020, Ex.C5 copy of e-mail dated 28.6.2020, Ex.C6 copy of e-mail dated 29.6.2020, Ex.C7 copy of e-mail dated 30.6.2020, Ex.C8 copy of e-mail dated 8.7.2020, Ex.C9 copy of e-mail dated 4.7.2020 and closed evidence.
6. On the other hand, ld. counsel for OP has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, affidavit of Miss Sheetal Tiwari, Authorized signatory, alongwith documents Ex.OP1 copy of press note issued byDIPP,Ex.OP2 copy of terms and conditions and closed evidence.
7. We have heard the complainant in person, ld. counsel for OP and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. Ex.C1, is the copy of tax invoice of Rs.9999/- whereby said TV in question was purchased by the complainant.Ex.C2 is the document showing dates of placement and delivery of product in question. Exs.C3to C7 &C9 are the e-mails received from the OP with regard to installation of T.V. and Ex.C8 is the e-mail received from the OP with regard to cancellation of installation and demo of T.V.
9. From the record, it is evident that the order was placed on 5.6.2020 and delivery of the same was made on 8.6.2020. It is admitted by the OP that the product has been sold through their platform. It is pleaded by the OP that it has not involved in the entire transaction executed between the seller and complainant and has only tried to resolve the grievances of the complainant by giving proper resolution of the same. It is also pleaded that installation of the product has been delayed due to logistic constraints due to Govt. guidelines during covid period. Here, it is important to note here that when product can be delivered during covid period then why the same could not be installed during that period. No plausible explanation or justification is forthcoming on behalf of the OP. Thus, the plea of the OP that there were logistic constraints due to Govt. guidelines during covid period is not tenable. Cancellation of installation and demo of T.V. in question is unjustified and amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
10.  In view of our above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed and the OP is directed  as under:

1. To refund to the complainant, amount of Rs.9999/-alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. 5.6.2020, within 30 days from the date of receipt of free certified copy of order, failing which OP shall pay interest @9%  p.a. from the date of said order till realization.
2. To pay Rs.2000/-as compensation inclusive of costs for causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant, within prescribed period.

11. The instant complaint could not be disposed of within stipulated period due to Covid protocol and for want of Quorum for  long time.
85109252238716.  
85109252238717.  

                                              G.S.Nagi                           S.K.AGGARWAL

                                              Member                          President