DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.145 of 21-05-2018

Decided on 05-02-2019

Bittu Kumar aged about 24 years S/o Dalip Singh R/o House No.5299, Street No.9, Shiv Colony, Karnal (Haryana) Now R/o Villa No.602, Room No.3, HMEL Township, Refinery Road, Raman Mandi, District Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Flipkart, Unit No.403, 4th Floor, Baani-1, Next to Hilton, Double Tree Hotel Golf, Course Road, Sector-56, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122011, through its Authorized Signatory.

2.Flipkart Internet Private Limited, Vaishnavi Summit Ground Floor, 7th Main 80 ft. Road, 3rd Block Koramangala Industrial Layout, Bangalore KA-560034 IN, through its Authorized Signatory.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

Sh.M.P Singh Pahwa, President.

Smt.Manisha Member

Present:-

Complainant: Sh.Bittu Kumar in person.

For opposite party No.1: Sh.Vikas Kumar, Advocate.

Opposite party No.2: Ex-parte.

ORDER

M.P Singh Pahwa, President

1. The complainant Bittu Kumar (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against opposite parties Flipkart and Other (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

2. Briefly, the case of the complainant is that he purchased online one laptop Lenovo Ideapad Core i3 for Rs.24,990/- vide invoice dated 19.12.2017. Before purchase, opposite parties showed offer to the complainant that if he purchased the laptop from them, he will get Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty on 00 costs and additional 10% instant discount with HDFC card.

3. It is alleged that on the assurance regarding offer of opposite party No.1, the complainant purchased the laptop. It was also assured that the complainant will receive the warranty certificate through online and warranty of the laptop shall be extended two year extra from one year warranty, which was already given by opposite parties.

4. It is further alleged that thereafter the complainant did not receive any warranty certificate. He requested opposite parties through e-mail on 30.12.2017. Opposite parties assured continuously to the complainant to receive the warranty certificate as possible through e-mail, but on 30.1.2018, they showed their inability to provide extended warranty and offered gift card worth Rs.500/-. The complainant refused to accept the offer of gift card and made request to issue extended warranty certificate, but to no effect. The complainant also made call to National Consumer Helpline. His complaint was registered vide No.624655. On the suggestion of National Consumer Helpline, the complainant again made requests to opposite parties, but to no effect.

   On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has pleaded that due to act and conduct of opposite parties, he is suffering from great mental tension, agony, botheration and harassment. For these sufferings, he has claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and extended warranty of 2 years. Hence, this complaint.

5. Upon notice, opposite party No.1 appeared through its counsel and contested the complaint by filing its written version. It is relevant to mention that opposite party No.1 appeared on behalf of 'Tech Connect Retail Pvt. Ltd.'

   In its written version, opposite party No.1 (Tech Connect Retail Pvt. Ltd.) has raised the preliminary objections that reply is being filed by 'Tech Connect Retail Private Limited'. It is admitted that opposite party No.1 is carrying on the business of sale of goods manufactured/produced by others. It is registered reseller on the website 'Flipkart.Com' and it sells products of other manufacturers and traders, etc. under their respective trade marks through the website.

6. It is further pleaded that the complaint is an abuse of due process of law. The complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. He has not properly impleaded parties in this complaint. The address given by him is of the present opposite party i.e. Tech Connect Retail Private Limited.

7. It is also pleaded that the complainant never approached opposite party No.1 for the claim. The real problem is with these two companies i.e. Flipkart and Jeeves, which have not been impleaded as opposite party.

8. It is also pleaded that the warranty/guarantee of any kind is only provided by the manufacturer of the product as it is in the technical field. Opposite party No.1 is only seller of the product. The complainant never approached opposite party No.1 with regard to any kind of problem.

9. Thereafter on merits also, contesting opposite party has denied all the averments of the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

10. After that on the application of complainant, opposite party No.2 was impleaded as party. Notice to opposite party No.2 was also issued, but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against it.

11. Parties were asked to produce the evidence.

12. In support of his claim, the complainant has tendered into evidence photocopy of bill, (Ex.C1); photocopy of offer, (Ex.C2); photocopies of e-mails, (Ex.C3 to Ex.C5); his affidavit dated 9.5.2018, (Ex.C6) and closed the evidence.

13. To rebut the claim of the complainant, opposite party No.1 has tendered into evidence photocopy of authority letter, (Ex.OP1/1); affidavit of Vinod Kumar Singh dated 13.7.2018, (Ex.OP1/2) and closed the evidence.

14. We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for opposite party No.1 and gone through the file carefully.

15. The complainant and learned counsel for opposite party No.1 have reiterated their stand as taken in their respective pleadings and detailed above. It is further submitted by the complainant that Ex.C2, is copy of offer of Flipkart placed by him. It proves that offer applied was 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' at the cost of Rs.0/- and additional 10% instant discount. As the complainant did not receive extended warranty, he has taken up the matter with opposite party No.2 vide e-mails, (Ex.C3 to Ex.C5).These documents that prviously, after repeated correspondence, opposite party No.2 vide e-mail dated 31.12.2017 admitted that 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' is available with the product purchased by the complainant and complainant was intimated that extended warranty is sent to him on his registered e-mail. Subsequently, vide e-mail, (Ex.C4), opposite party No.2 intimated that it was not able to provide extended warranty and it only offered compensation of Rs.500/-. Therefore, this correspondence prove that the complainant was entitled to 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' and opposite party No.2 has failed to provide the same. Opposite party No.2 has also not come forward to contest the claim of the complainant. Therefore, the complaint be accepted as prayed for.

16. We have given careful consideration to these rival submissions.

17. Ex.C1, proves that the complainant purchased one Lenovo Ideapad Core for Rs.24,490/-. Ex.C2, is copy of order of product purchased with Flipkart (opposite party No.2). As per this document, offer applied for was'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' and 10% instant discount. The complainant has placed on record correspondence with opposite party No.2, (Ex.C3 to Ex.C5). Ex.C3, proves that opposite party No.2 admitted that 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' is available to the complainant with his product, but vide Ex.C4, opposite party No.2 expressed its inability to provide extended warranty and offered Rs.500/- only. There is nothing on record to justify this stand of opposite party No.2. Therefore, it is proved that the complainant was entitled to 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' and opposite party No.2 has failed to provide the same. Opposite party No.2 has not come forward to rebut the claim of the complainant. As such, adverse inference can be drawn against it for this reason also. Of-course, the complainant has filed the complaint against opposite party No.1, but there is nothing to prove any offer by opposite party No.1.

18. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.5000/- in favour of the complainant and against opposite party No.2 and dismissed qua opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.2 is directed to provide 'Flipkart Protect Extended Warranty' to the complainant.

19. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

20. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

21. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record.

    Announced:-

    05-02-2019 (M.P Singh Pahwa)

    President

     

     

    (Manisha)

    Member