Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                    Complaint No. : 265

                                                                    Instituted on     : 08.04.2021

                                                                    Decided on       : 04.11.2022

Atul Gandhi son of Vijay Kumar R/o H.No. 229/b(II), Para Mohalla, Rohtak Tehsil and District Rohtak.

                                                                             .......................Complainant.

                             Vs.

1. Flipkart Internet Private Limited Building Alyssa, Begonia Clove Embassy Tech Village, outer ring road Devarabeesanahalli Village Bengaluru, Pin Code 560103. E-mail:-cs@flipkart.com
2. Vision Star India Pvt. Limited Saira House Opposite Atlanta Estate behind Pinky Auto, Ram Bali Compound ETT Bhatti Goregaon (E) Mumbai Pin:-400063 Email:-rekha98203@gmail.com
3. Flipkart Head Office Sarita Vihar Block B Sector-25 Badarpur New Delhi Pin Code 110076 Mobile No. 09078549401 Email:- Grievance.officer @ flipkart.com.

                                                                             ……….Opposite parties.

          COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Complainant in person.

                   Shri Kunal Juneja, Advocate for the opposite party No. 1.  

                   Opposite party No. 2 and 3 already given up.

ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case, as per the complainant are that he purchased a mobile phone of Realme Company Model Narzo 10 on 14.07.2020 for an amount of Rs.11,924/- which was paid to opposite party no. 1. This payment was made by the complainant from the account of his mother.  After confirmation of the payment, the opposite party no. 3 had issued an order ID No.OD119156353143604000. After making the payment of above mentioned product, the order of the complainant could not be placed and till now the complainant has not received the above said product. It is further submitted that complainant got registered an online complaint in this regard on Flipkart. After getting lodged the complaint, the complainant was informed that refund of Rs.11,924/- has been done on dated 15.07.2020 by the opposite party no. 3. Thereafter complainant checked his bank account for the refunded amount but refund was never made by the opposite parties. The complainant again informed to the opposite party about his grievance but the opposite party did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. As such, there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence, this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay an amount of Rs.11,924/- alongwith interest @ of 24% and also to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses and Rs.50,000/- on account of harassment to the complainant.  

2.                          After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No. 1 in its reply has submitted that the answering opposite party is neither a Bank nor the seller of the product in this case. The product purchased by the complainant was sold by a third party seller who is registered on ‘Flipkart platform’ as can be evidenced from the invoice copy. It is further submitted that the answering opposite party only provides an online platform where third party sellers sell their products and visitors/buyers purchase such products from the respective sellers on the website/app out of their own free will and choice. Complainant himself has admitted in  his complaint that the answering opposite party already informed the complainant regarding the refund has been initiated on dated 15.07.2020 by the respondent no.3. It is again submitted that the grievance of the complainant should have been only against the opposite party no. 3 and with the complainant bank who has not updated the amount in the account of the complainant and not the answering opposite party. It is further submitted that refund of the product is only determined by the Bank. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party no.1 prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. However, opposite party no. 2 and 3 have been given up by complainant vide his separate statement dated 25.01.2022.

4.                Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C15 and has closed his evidence on dated 16.05.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No. 1 tendered document Ex. R-1, made a statement that reply already filed on his behalf be read into evidence and closed his evidence on dated 20.09.2022.

5.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

6.                 In the present case it is not disputed that complainant placed an order for purchase of a mobile phone with the opposite party No.1 and an amount of Rs.11924/- was deducted from the account of his mother Smt. Poonam, as is proved from the statement of account Ex.C1. From the  photocopy of document Ex.C3, it is proved that an amount of Rs.11924/- was paid to flipkart through UPI Transaction  ID 019612996062 from the account of Poonam, mother of complainant. As per order details Ex.C4 dated 14^th July 2019, it is mentioned that the complainant had paid for the order but order was not placed. As per email Ex.C5, opposite party No.1 has submitted that the refund of Rs.11924/- has been completed on 15 July 2020 by seller and the amount has been credited to the UPI intent account of the complainant by 15 July 2020. As per Ex.C6, opposite party has submitted that the amount should be reflected in the bank account of the complainant till 27 July 2020. But despite the  repeated requests and whatsapp chat of the parties placed on record as Ex.C8 to Ex.C12, the said amount was not received by the complainant. To prove the same, complainant has placed on record Detail statement of bank Ex.C7 w.e.f. 14.07.2020 to 2908.2020. As per the alleged statement, no amount of Rs.11924/- has been credited in the account of complainant. Account statement Ex.C1 is w.e.f. 14.07.2020 to 05.02.2021. But in this statement also, no amount is credited by the opposite party. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party No.1 is liable to refund the alleged amount to the complainant.

7.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.1 to refund the amount of Rs.11924/-(Rupees eleven thousand nine hundred and twenty four only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 08.04.2021 till its realization and shall also pay Rs.6000/-(Rupees six thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service as well as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.

8.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

04.11.2022.

                                                          .....................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          ..........................................

                                                          Tripti Pannu, Member

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member