IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday the 31st day of October, 2017
Filed on 22.06.2017
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.174/2017
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. Sahad Nasar 1. Flipkart, No 42/1/43
S/o P.Nasar Kacherakana Halil Village
Sneharppan Villa Jadigenahalli Hoobli
Zachariya Ward Hoskote Taluk
Alappuzha Banglore
2. WS Retail Service Pvt. Ltd
SND Ware House, Shed No.C1
Door No.4/95. Red Hills
Ambattur Road,
Chennai – 600062.
3. Techno Craft Services
10, Roayl Plaza, SH 16
Periyar Nagar, Aluva
Kerala – 683 101
4. Le Eco Smart Phone
7th Floor, Umiya Business Bay
Cessna Business Park 11 and
13/2, Kadubeesanahlli Village
Outer Ring road, Varthur Hobli Banglore – 560103.
O R D E R
SMT. JASMINE D. (MEMBER)
The case of the complainant in short is as follows:-
Complainant purchased a mobile phone manufactured by 4th opposite party for an amount of Rs. 11,999/- on 20/7/16 through filpkart. Opposite party assured one year warranty for the product. After 7 months the product became defective. The complainant approached 3rd opposite party and entrusted the phone for repairing on 12/4/17 and the 3rd opposite party intimated the complaint that problem with regard to the mother board and assured to rectify the defect within 20 days. There after the complainant approached this opposite party many times for getting the phone rectified. But 3rd opposite party on 30/5/17 informed the complainant that manufacturer stopped functioning therefore the product could not be repaired or replaced. The complainant could not use the phone since the display of the phone was not at all working and the complainant lost his stored photos, contact numbers and other important details. Complainant sustained much mental agony and inconvenience and hence filed this complaint seeking refund of the price of the phone together with compensation and cost.
2. Notice was served to the opposite parties. Opposite party 1 and 2 filed version opposite party 3 and 4 did not appear before the Forum hence opposite party 3 and 4 were set expartie.
3. Version of the 1st opposite party is as follows:-
Complaint is not maintainable before the Forum. That the opposite party.1 Flipkart Internet Private Limited is a company duly registered under the provision of the companies Act.1956 and having its registered office at Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, 7th main, 80 Feet Road3rd Block, Kormangala Industrial Layout. Banglore 560034, Karnataka. The company is engaged, amount others. In providing trading/ selling facility over the internet through its website www. Flipkart.com and mobile application (Mob App) (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Flipkart Plat form”) The opposite partyNO.1 provides online market place platform/technology and or other mechanism/ services to the sellers and buyers of products to facilitate the transactions, electronic commerce for various goods, by and between respective buyers and sellers and enables them to deal in various categories of goods including but not limited to mobiles, camera, computers, watches clothes, footwear, healthcare and personal products home appliances and electronics etc. That the opposite party No.1 only acts as an intermediary through its web interface www. Flipkart.com and provides a medium to various sellers all over India to offer for sale and sell their product(s) to the users of the Flipkart Plat form. It is submitted that these sellers are separate entity being controlled and managed by different persons/ Stake holders. The answering opposite party 1 does not directly or indirectly sells any products on flipkart Platform. Rather all the products on flipkart platform are sold by 3rd party sellers, who avail of the online market place services provided by the answering opposite party 1 on terms decided by the respective sellers ony. The ultimate monetary beneficiary of such sale proceedings is the seller. It is further submitted that, any kind of assurance whether in terms of warranty on the products, Price, Discounts, Promotional offers, after sale services or otherwise, are offered and provided by the manufacturer of respective product on Flipkart Platform. The opposite party No.1 neither offers nor provides any assurance and /or offers warranty to the end buyers of the product. Complainant does not fall under the category of consumer of this opposite party. The 1st opposite party is not a trader nor a service provider and there is no privity of contract between the complainant and this opposite party. It is pertinent to note that no relief is saught against this opposite party the product purchased by the complainant has not been sold by this opposite party. Complainant had purchased the product from one of the seller listed on the Flipkart. This opposite part is not involved in the entire transaction between seller and the complainant. That the contents of ParaNo.1 of the complaint in so far as the complainant purchasing one mobile (LeEco Smart Phone) on 20/7/2016 for Rs. 11,999/- through Opposite party No.1 is a matter of record as the complainant himself has admitted the fact that opposite partyNo.1 is mere an intermediary. However it is pertinent to mention here that the opposite Party No.1 is neither a seller nor the manufacturer/producer/service centre of the Product in the case. The product purchased by the complainant was manufactured by Opposite party No.4 and sold by a third party seller registered on Flipkart Platform as is evident from the invoice copy attached by the complainant with the complaint. The opposite party No.1 is not involved in the entire transaction of sale and purchase either directly or through any seller. Rest of the content is mere statement and hence needs no reply. That the content of para No.7 of the present complaint is completely false, fabricated and hence denied. It is to be submitted that the role of the Opposite party No.1 is only limited to providing online platform of facilitate the while transaction of sale and purchase of goods by the respective sellers and buyers on its Flipkart Platform. It is pertinent to mention here that the opposite party No.1 is not engaged in selling of any goods on its own and Opposite party No.1 has never sold any goods/ product to the
complainant. Also, it is strongly denied that the complainant ever approached to the opposite partyNo.1 for redressal of his grievance. Hence by no stretch of imagination. It can be said that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party No.1 In view of the aforementioned, it is submitted that the opposite party No.1 has not caused any kind of harassment or otherwise loss to the complainant and hence the complainant does not become entitled to claim any relief from the opposite party No.1. Complainant is not entitled the claim any relief the opposite party the complaint may be dismissed.
4. Version of the 2nd opposite party is as follows:-
The complaint is not maintainable. That it is pertinent to mention here that the Opposite party No.2 is not engaged in the sale of any goods manufactured or produced by its own. The Opposite party No.2 is engaged in sale of goods manufactured and produced by other manufacturers. Thus, we state that Opposite party No.2 have a Separate and distinct identity from that of the manufacturer of the product ie, Le Eco(Opposite party No.4), and there is no relation of Principal & Agent between Le Eco and Opposite party No.2 . Further, the warranty along with warranty terms & conditions on the product is also extended by the manufacturer and not by Opposite party No.2. In case of any concerns with the product, resolution can be provided only by the manufacturer or its Authorised service centre. It is pertinent to mention here that Ws Retail has no control over the manufacturer or its Authorized Service Centers and hence the complaint is bad for Miss- Jointer of party. This opposite party is registered seller on the website Flipkart.com and since product of other manufacturers and traders etc. The opposite party No.2 submits that the above complaint is wholly false, frivolous and vexatious and has been filed with malefide intention and for harassing the Opposite party No.2. The complaint is not maintainable either law or on facts and is liable to be dismissed in limine as it does not show any cause of action against the opposite party No.2. The present complaint is devoid of any merits and the averments made in the complaint are baseless and do not cover the complete facts of the case and are made only with the intention of defame the opposite party No.2 and extorting money in an unlawful manner. Therefore, the complaint is liable to
be dismissed on this ground alone. That the opposite party No.2 submits that the products sold by the opposite partyNo.2 carries manufacturer’s warranty. As a reseller, involvement of Opposite party No.2 in the entire transaction is limited only to selling the products of various manufacturers. It is pertinent to mention here that there has neither been any shortage of supply nor any deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party No.2. Liability to provide after sale services does not lie upon the opposite party No.2 as the opposite party No.2 is neither the manufacturer and hence, no cause of action lies against the opposite party No.2 in the present complaint. Further the opposite party no.2 would like to state that the Manufacturer and the Service Centre in the present case is opposite party No.4 & 3 respectively. That it is reiterated that opposite party No.2 is an online reseller registered on ‘Flipkart.com.’ Opposite party No.2 not the manufacturer but an online reseller and the products sold by opposite party No.2 carry warranty issued/ provided by the respective manufacturers against manufacturing defects subject to the terms & conditions determined by the manufacturers only. Irrespective of the warranty provided by the manufacturer, as a goodwill gesture the opposite party No.2 provides 30 days return/ replacement policy to its customer in case there is any issue with the product which cannot be rectified However, in the instant matter the complainant had used the product in issue for more than 9 Months without any issue and than contacted the service centre ie. Opposite partyNo.3 appointed for the purpose of providing after sale during the warranty period by the manufacturer ie. Opposite party No.4 with the alleged issue in the product as the complainant has acknowledge that they are the right concerned authority to address the alleged issue, More over the complainant never contacted the Answering the opposite party No2 for any grievance. Thus, the natural conclusion that follows from the above facts is that the opposite party No.2 cannot be made liable for any subsequent defect in the product. Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed against the Answering Opposite party No.2. That it is most respectfully submitted that any grievance which the complainant has is only against the authorized service centre for not providing after sale services and the opposite party No.2 has no role to play in offering or providing after sale services to the customers. As it is a settled proposition
of law that the liability for defects in product or its after sale service issues rests with the manufacturer and its authorized service center only, Hence , it is submitted that the present complaint should have been only against the manufacturer and authorized service centre appointed by the manufacturer and the complainant has been wrong in arraying the opposite party No.2 in the present complaint. Hence the complaint may be dismissed.
3. Complaint filed proof affidavit and produced 3 documents which were marked as Ext.A1 to Ext.A3.
4. Considering the allegations of the complainant the forum has raised the following issues.
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief?
5. The case of the complainant is that complainant had purchased a mobile phone manufactured by the 4th opposite party through flipkart for an amount of Rs. 11,999/- the opposite parties assured one year warranty for the product, during the warranty period the product became defective and the defect has been intimated to the 3rd opposite party. Who is the authorized service centre of the 4th opposite party intimated the complaint that since the manufacturer ceases the functioning they could not rectify the defect. The complainant sustained much mental agony and hence filed this complaint.
6. Complainant filed proof affidavit and document Ext.A1 to Ext.A4 were marked. Ext.A1 is the retail invoice dated 20/7/2016 from it can be seen that complainant had purchased a mobile phone for Rs.11,999/-. Ext.A2 is the job sheet dated 12/4/17. Ext.A3 is the warranty. From the documents it can be seen that the product became defective during the warranty period. According to the complainant he has entrusted to the phone to the 3rd opposite party who is the authorized service centre, but it has not been rectified and returned so far. Even though the notice was served to the 3rd opposite party they did not appear before the Froum. The act of the 3rd opposite party shows their careless and irresponsible attitude. Since opposite party failed to rectify the defect which arose within the warranty period they have committed deficiency in service. This arose within the warranty
period and the complaint is entitled to get the relief. On scanning the documents and version filed by the opposite parties 1 and 2 we can’t see any deficiency in service on their part so we can’t held opposite party 1 and 2 for any deficiency in service.
In the result the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties 3 and 4 are directed to refund the price of the mobile phone Rs.11.999/-(Rupees Eleven thousand Nine hundred and Ninety nine only) to the complainant the opposite parties 3 and 4 are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1000/-(Rupees One thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.1000/- (Rupees Thousand only) towards cost. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of the receipt of this order, failing which an amount of Rs.11,999/- shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of October, 2017.
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) : .
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/-Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Appendix:-
Ext.A1 - Retail invoice dtd. 20.7.2016.
Ext.A2 - Receipt dtd. 12.4.2017.
Ext.A3 - Book let (Warranty card .
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- br/-
Compared by:-
