SRI G.K. RATH, PRESIDENT …                The brief history of case is that, the complainant had procured a Timex TWOO2E118 Analog Watch (men) bearing Order Id No.OD109557803606728000, Invoice no.FAAF8Y1800005431 on dated 29.06.2017 from the OP.no.1 for Rs.540/-. So the complainant contends that after received the said product he found the watch was not well packed, the base container was touched with the glass, the glass of watch full of scratches, the time not properly displayed, and looks like a dead condition and there was no warranty card and instruction manual inside the wrapper cover of the product. Hence he approached the OP.s requesting to return the said product but his request was cancelled on dt.15.07.2017. So due to the illegal actions of OP.s the complainant harassed, inflicting great mental strain, physical pain and financial losses hence craves the leave of this forum and prayed to direct the OP.s to pay the price of alleged handset and a sum of Rs.3000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation.

2.         The counsel for OP.No.1 entered his appearance and filed his counter in the case and averred that, the OP.1 only online marketplace platform and just an intermediary of buyer and seller. The OP.1 neither a trader nor a service provider, hence the case is not maintainable and the forum has no jurisdiction to try the case and the complainant wrongly arrayed this OP as a necessary party in the case. Hence the case is liable to dismiss as the complaint is bad for mis-joinder of party. He also contends that the return request of complainant was accepted by this OP but the request was cancelled due to some technical issues. Thereafter the OP.1 tried to contact the complainant but there was no response from his side. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of this OP. so he prayed to dismiss the case against the OP.1.

3.         The counsel for OP.no.3 has filed his counter and averred that, the present case is not maintainable and the complainant neither informed about any complaint nor submitted any complaint prior to file the case. The complainant filed the present complaint without any specific allegation on the part of this OP.3. He contends that the complainant had purchased the watch set from OP.1 & 2 but not from OP.3. Hence the OP.3 cannot be held liable for any acts or omissions. So he contends in details nothing except evasive denials and prayed to dismiss the case against the OP.3 in the ends of justice.

4.         The counsel for complainant has filed copy of invoice of the product and an affidavit in support of his complaint. The counsel for OP.1 & 3 filed copy of some documents in support of their claim. The OP.2 absent on call hence he set ex parte. Heard from the counsel for complainant & OP.1 at length and perused the record.

5.         From the above submissions, it reveals that the complainant being allured with the attractive advertisement in the web portal of OP.1 has ordered the Timex Watch in question on dt.29.06.2017 by prepaid Rs.540/- and when the same opened reported defect and appears scratches on the glass of the watch. It is seen that, the complainant time and again approached the OP.s reporting the so called defects, but the OP.s neither replaced the set nor paid its cost. Perusing the evidences, submissions by the complainant, we are of the view that, the watch set purchased by the complainant has defective and the OP.1 being the supplier of the product failed to render any satisfactory service to the complainant within a short period of purchase. Moreover the OP.1 admitted in his counter that the complainant soon after receive of the product had lodged complaint for its replacement but for some technical issues they cancelled the request of complainant. Thus the complainant suffered mental agony with the defective set, and also inflicted financial losses and valuable times for the negligence and unfair practices of OP.s, hence he craves for the leave of this forum and prayed for appropriate compensation.

6.         From the above discussions and perusing the submissions filed by the complainant, it is noticed that, the OP.s despite receiving notice of this forum are failed to take any initiations to satisfy the complainant and there is nothing to reject the contentions of complainant, per se, we feel that the action of OP.1 is arbitrary and unfair and against the principles of res judicata, which amounts to deficiency in service hence found guilty under the provisions of the C.P.Act 1986, as thus the complainant is lawfully entitled for compensatory relief. As such the complaint is allowed against OP.s with costs.       

                                                                                         ORDER                                           

i.          The opposite parties supra are jointly and severally hereby directed to pay the cost of the Watch set Rs.540/- (Rupees five hundred & forty) in place of the alleged defective Watch set, inter alia, to pay Rs.2,000/-(Two thousand) as compensation and a sum of Rs.1000/-(One thousand) towards the cost of litigation to the complainant.

ii.         All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on this the 30th day of Dec' 2017.

     Sd/-                                       Sd/-                                            Sd/-

 MEMBER                          MEMBER                            PRESIDENT,DCDRF,

(Sri R.S.Nayak)              (Smt M.Padhi)                                  (Sri G.K.Rath)