DATE OF DISPOSAL: 22.04.2024

PER:  SRI SATISH KUMAR PANIGRAHI, PRESIDENT

            The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed this Consumer complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties  (in short O.Ps.) and for redressal of his  grievance before this Commission.

            2. The complainant is need for one mobile phone for his office/personal use ordered a REDMI Note 12 pro 5G (Stardust Purple, 128 GB) by Flipkart on BIG billion day offer of 3000 for exchange his old MI Redmi Note 5 Pro and deduct for Rupees 7200/-including exchange offer on 18^th September 2023 with Flipkart order ID-OD42187862999980100 but they cancelled from their end on 22th September 2023 showing reason customer not available.   When the complainant complained against it they said wait for resolution and replied reason is the courier service provider has informed us that the order has been cancelled due to an unforeseen issue. On 8^th October 2023 the complainant again order the same product with advance payment taking a loan with exchange of same mobile for deducting Rs.5900/- including exchange offer with Flipkart order ID-OD429355953663761100 but again they cancelled it on 13^th October 2023 showing reason customer not available when delivery boy not called him a single time.  The complainant complained to flipkart customer care and on 14^th October 2023 a call received from a courier boy of a kart logistics give login OTP. The complainant asked them why should he give login OTP then he said cancel your product from your end, because exchange service is not available why flipkart not showed same then he started to threaten me and uses vulgar language. Then again a boy from their office namely Krushna Pradhan says come to the office then I attend office for receiving the product but he forced him to cancel my order and started misbehaving in the courier office and asking for full money. So that the complainant felt very harassed. Then he registers a complained at National Consumer Helpline with Docket No.503442. After all this issue on 18^th October 2023 his order automatically cancelled from their end and revert his money on 26^th October 2023. So he suffered and pay interest of 21 days for his loan amount. They advise him for make a fresh order without any exchange offer. The mobile is necessary for him because in his budget this is the best handset and this is available only on this a commerce site. So the complainant again order on 12^th November 2023 through the payment of credit card with EMI (prepaid) with flipkart order ID-OD429666855109637100 in that time and it shows expected delivery date is 15^th November 2023. After 18^th November 2023 it shows due to an unforeseen issue his delivery is delayed and it will reach on 21^st November 2023 but this time also crossed. So he contact with customer care but they do not respond his request and said again cancel his order. Due to excess use of credit card it affects on his credit score (CIBIL) for that it may suffer him to taking a loan. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to pay compensation amount of Rs.30,000/-, litigation cost of Rs.25,000/- in the best interest of justice.  

            3. After due notice the O.P. did not appear, hence the O.P. is declared exparte on 02.01.2024.  Thereafter on 11.01.2024 Sri Silla Rajgopal Rao, Advocate filed Vakalatanama on behalf of O.P. with a copy of Board Resolution.  On 21.03.24, the advocate for the op filed evidence on affidavit and written argument on behalf of the op without set-aside the exparte order dated:02.01.2024. Hence the same was not taken into consideration while passing of the final order.

           4. On the date of hearing we heard argument from the complainant. We have gone through the complaint petition supported by affidavit and documents available in the record.

            On evaluation of the evidences adduced by the complainant, it is manifest that every time the Courier service provider of the local area of the complainant cancelled the order by taking different pleas. Knowing the same nevertheless the complainant did not implead the E-Kart courier service provider as necessary party in the case. In absence of necessary party or non-joinder of necessary party in the case, no effective order can be passed. The law is well settled in Laxmishankar Harishankar Bhatt v. Yashram Vasta (Dead) by LRs reported in AIR 1993 SC 1587 the Hon’ble Apex Court of India held that, ‘for non-joinder of necessary party, the complaint would be bad.’

Further, the Complainant has drawn the attention of the Commission during course of final hearing that, the OP Flipkart has refunded all the amounts to the Complainant when the orders were cancelled. It is apparent from the case record that, no corroborative documents regarding loan account has filed by the complainant. Hence payment of interest for 21 days by the complainant is ruled out.

Considering the above factual aspects of the case and the principle of law laid down in Laxmishankar (Supra), the Commission dismissed the Complaint against the opposite party.

            The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 or they may download same from the www.confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of the order received from this Commission.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

Pronounced on 22.04.2024