The appeal is directed against the order of Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri dated 16/04/2019 in reference to CC/16/S/2019. The fact of the case in nutshell is that the appellant/complainant has ordered to Flipkart Ltd. for a mobile phone, namely, Lenovo K8 Plus (Fine Gold) 32 GB on 13/09/2017 through his friend Mr. Sandeep Das and the payment mode was selected through EMI credit card maintained by Axis Bank, Sevoke Road Branch. On the very date, the complainant/appellant had cancelled the delivery order of the phone and asked for refund of money from the Flipkart that is respondent no. 1. The respondent no. 1 had cancelled the order and confirmed about refund of money to the account of the appellant maintained with Axis Bank, Sevoke Road Branch viz. respondent no. 3. But the respondent no. 3 continued to deduct the EMI from the account of the complainant/appellant. The appellant/complainant on repeated occasions has approached the Axis Bank to resolve the issue and to stop the deduction of EMI and to credit the deducted money to his account on refund. The Axis Bank did not do so.

            So, the appellant/complainant approached the Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri by consumer complaint under Section 12 of the CP Act, 1986. At the point of the admission of the consumer complaint, the complainant was asked by the Ld. Forum to produce some supportive documents in reference to his case which could not be complied with by the appellant/complainant and for that reason, the case was not admitted on merit vide order dated 16/04/2019.

            Being aggrieved with this order this appeal follows on the ground that the order was misconceived, erroneous and contrary to law and suffers from material irregularity. The appeal was registered in due time and the notice was issued on all the respondents that is (1) Flipkart Company, (2) Instakart Services Pvt. Ltd., office of Flipkart and also to (3) The Axis Bank Ltd. from where the complainant/appellant obtained the credit card. All the respondents have separately contested the case by appointing legal counsels to conduct the hearing of appeal.

            Accordingly, the appeal was heard in presence of all the contesting parties of this case.

D E C I S I O N S   W I T H   R E A S O N S

            During the course of hearing of appeal, Ld. Advocate of the appellant submits that at the time of registering the instant consumer complaint, he had filed all the relevant documents in support of his case and beside that he had no other documents to produce before the Ld. Forum and Ld. Forum on the basis of documents, already submitted by the complainant was well empowered to admit the case of the complainant. But the Ld. Forum at the initial stage of the case without admitting the consumer complaint haphazardly dismissed the same on admissibility point which is totally repugnant to law. So, the order of Ld. Forum should be set aside and the appellant should get an opportunity for full course of hearing over his consumer dispute.

            Ld. Advocate of the Flipkart Company at the time of hearing the appeal mentioned that as per provisions of Section 79 and 81 of the IT Act, 2000 and the other provisions of the said act has an overriding effect over the provisions of the other law for the time being in force and it was duly ratified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in civil appeal no. 5168 of 2000. So, the instant consumer complaint was not at all maintainable in the eye of law. He further mentioned in his argument that the entire grievance of appellant is only against the Axis Bank India for not obligating to its agreed commitments and the Flipkart Company Ltd. does not have any role to play in such commitment made by the Axis Bank India towards the complainant.

            Ld. Advocate of the respondent no. 3 that is Axis Bank Ltd. at the time of her argument mentioned that the appellant has filed the instant consumer complaint with unclean hands and has suppressed the material facts before the Ld. forum for which his consumer complaint was rightly dismissed in the admission stage and there is no scope to revive the said consumer complaint to act in force.      

            After hearing the valuable arguments canvassed before this Commission through learned legal counsels of all sides, it appears to us that at the time of admission of a consumer complaint, the primary responsibility of the adjudicating authority is to look after the technicalities of the case to confirm whether the instant dispute comes within the arena of consumer dispute or not and whether it has been filed in the proper territorial jurisdiction and the pecuniary jurisdiction also to be determined at that point of time. If the complainant can substantiate the prima facie of his case, then, the Forum should allow the complaint to be proceeded after securing the presence of other sides.

            We know very well that according to settle principle of law where a particular statute itself confers the rights and provides the remedies for their enforcement, then resort must be had to statute exclusively. The Consumer Protection Act and the very concepts of “consumer”, “service” and “deficiency in service” are totally new one. Then the Consumer Forum shall have the duty to look after the interest of the consumer so that the grievances can be meted out very sincerely. Here, in this case, the approach of Ld. Forum was not convincing one as because without giving him opportunity to proceed with the case the Ld. Forum has abruptly dismissed the complaint on admission stage for want of some documents which was not the right approach of a Forum. So, the order of Ld. Forum appears to be misconceived and not proper in law.

            Thus, the appeal succeeds on its merit.

            Here, in this case, all the contesting parties of the instant consumer dispute has already contested the appeal and they are well aware about the existence of the consumer case and for that reason, they are well entitled to contest the instant consumer case by filing their written versions before the Ld. Forum and to safe the time limits the Commission thinks it fit to admit the consumer complaint in this appellate stage so that the Ld. Consumer Forum can adjudicate the dispute within a short span of time.

Hence it is ordered: -

            That the instant appeal be and the same is allowed on contest without any cost. The order of Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri dated 16/04/2019 in reference to CC/16/S/2019 is hereby set aside. The instant consumer complaint under Section 12 filed by Uttam Kr. Acharyaa before the Ld. D.C.D.R.F. Siliguri bearing CC/16/S/2019 is hereby admitted on its own merit. The respondents of this appeal who happened to be the Opposite Parties of this case that is (1) Flipkart, (2) Instakart Services Pvt. Ltd., office of Flipkart and (3) Axis Bank Ltd. are directed to submit their written version before the Ld. Forum within 45 days from the date of receiving the copy of the order of this appeal. They may collect the copy of notice of the instant consumer complaint from the office of the Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri in due time and to submit the W.V within 45 days from the date of receiving the copy of order of this appeal.

            Let the copy of this order be handed over to the parties free of cost and the same be communicated to the Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Siliguri through e-mail service.