IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
KOLLAM
C.C.No. 195/2023
PRESENT
SMT. S.K.SREELA, B.A.L, LL.B, PRESIDENT
SMT. S.SANDHYA RANI. BSC, LL.B, MEMBER
SRI. STANLY HAROLD, B.A.LL.B, MEMBER
ORDER DATED: 31-07-2023
BETWEEN
Bismi Shamsudeen, 24 years,
D/o Shamsudeen, Kizhakkathil House,
Mylakkadu P.O.,
Kottiyam, Kollam 691571. : Complainant
AND
General Manager,
Flipkart India Pvt.Ltd.,
Vaishnavi Summit,
Ground Floor,
-
Kormangala Industrial Layout,
Bangalore, KA-560034, IN.:Opposite Party
ORDER
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.
The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-
Complainant ordered a Bean bag worth Rs.1,884/- from Flipkart account using registered mobile number 9567123629 through the Flipkart app in March 2023. The transaction was done and the shipping address provided was Syam Girilal, Goma Layam ,Decent junction P.O., Kottamkara 691577. Unfortunately, after a considerable amount of time had elapsed since the order, the complainant did not receive the product and when the complainant checked the application, it was shown that the product had been delivered. The complainant did not receive any call or message on the number given as the shipping address. Thereafter several times complainant along with her friends also had contacted the opposite party from different numbers but they did not give any kind of response.
Despite the complainant's multiple calls to Flipkart customer care, they only provided a specific time for a callback. The complainant patiently waited for that call. However, when the callback finally occurred, the opposite party showed no willingness to listen to the complainant's grievances. Instead, they informed her that they were unable to assist and instructed her to contact the hired team and register a formal complaint. Following their advice, the complainant proceeded to make a transaction with the hired team, who provided her with a promised delivery date. They assured her that the ordered goods would be delivered by that specific date or, if not possible, a refund for the fixed amount would be issued.
The complainant faced further issues when attempting to resolve the matter. She sent the money through an online system using her friend's account, with the details as follows: Syam Lal, IFC-FDRL0002281, A/c No.99980105569649, Kadappakkada branch. However, even after sending the payment, there was a complete lack of consideration and empathy from the opposite party. The complainant's attempts to contact them were met with phone disconnections, causing the complainant significant mental distress and agony due to the poor treatment received from the customer care and hired team of the opposite party. Despite multiple email communications, the opposite party still refused to listen to the customer's grievances or provide any resolution. As a result of these circumstances, the complainant took the matter seriously and filed a case before the cybercrime authorities with case number 21505230004488. The cyber cell authorities called the complainant and enquired about the details.
That the simple act of ordering a bean bag has led to numerous mental and health problems for the complainant. The conduct of the opposite party has been appalling, subjecting the complainant to a bad experience. When the complainant inquired about the delivery of the bean bag, she had to endure sexual harassment in the form of spam calls, which added further distress. Despite all the troubles faced, the opposite party offered false guarantees and failed to deliver the product or provide a satisfactory resolution. The complainant had to spend a significant amount of money, approximately INR 100,000, on follow-up travel and court expenses related to this issue over a three-month period. These problems caused considerable stress and hardship for the complainant.
That the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. As a result, the complainant seeks reimbursement for the amount paid for the bean bag and also compensation for the mental, health, and financial troubles caused by this situation. Hence, the complaint is being filed to address these issues and seek appropriate redressal.
Notice was issued to the opposite party and they failed to appear before the Commission hence they were set exparte. The complainant filed chief affidavit in lieu of chief examination and has been examined as PW1, marked Exts.P1 and P2 series. Ext.P1 is the complaint lodged before the Cyber cell, Kollam. Ext.P2 series are the email communications.
Based on the uncontroverted testimony of the complainant and the supporting documents, Ext.P1 and P2 series, it is evident that the complainant has provided substantial evidence to support her case. The documents presented, along with the complainant's testimony, seem to justify the relief she is seeking. The evidence indicates that the complainant indeed ordered the bean bag, made the payment, and has not received the product. Furthermore, the lack of response and poor conduct from the opposite party has caused the complainant mental and financial distress, as well as health problems.
From the evidence presented, it appears that the complainant has a strong case, and the relief she is seeking, including reimbursement for the amount paid for the bean bag and compensation for the troubles faced, seems justified.
The complainant's case is based on the fact that they ordered a bean bag for personal use from the opposite party, who assured them that the product would be delivered. Additionally, the opposite party represented that the bean bag was of high quality and met certain standards. The complainant made the purchase after acquiring awareness about the product and its features. However, despite the assurances and representations made by the opposite party, the bean bag was not delivered to the complainant. This has caused the complainant mental distress and financial losses, as they had paid for the product but did not receive it as promised.
The complainant had opted to order the bean bag based on the perceived advantages and benefits it offered. However, the failure of the opposite party to deliver the product has caused significant mental agony and tension for the complainant. The continuous harassment through mobile phone calls, many of which involved sexual harassment, further worsened the complainant's experience.
In response to these distressing circumstances, the complainant lodged Ext.P1 complaint before the cyber cell, seeking resolution and justice for the unfair treatment they have faced. The opposite party had an obligation to fulfill the order and deliver the bean bag as promised, but they failed to do so, leading to a breach of trust and causing considerable harm to the complainant.
The complainant's claim for reimbursement of the amount paid for the bean bag and compensation is justified, considering the mental distress, financial loss, and harassment they have endured due to the actions of the opposite party. The opposite party should be held accountable for their failure to fulfill their obligation and for their unfair trade practices, as the complainant's case is supported by ample evidence and merit.
After evaluating all the available materials on record, it is evident that the opposite party has indeed failed to fulfill their obligation to deliver the ordered bean bag. This failure constitutes a deficiency in service, as the complainant had a legitimate expectation to receive the product after making the purchase. The evidence presented supports the complainant's case and justifies her complaint. The nonfulfillment of the obligation by the opposite party has caused the complainant mental distress, financial losses, and subjected her to harassment, which further strengthens the validity of her claims.
Based on the evidence presented, it is evident that the complainant has successfully substantiated her case. The evidence clearly shows that she has been subjected to unlawful conduct, causing harm and losses. Therefore, the relief sought by the complainant is justified.
While the complainant did not specifically plead for compensation or costs in the initial complaint, it is important to consider the interest of justice in this matter. Given the mental distress, financial losses, and harassment endured by the complainant due to the opposite party's actions, a nominal compensation and costs seem reasonable and fair.
Addressing the grievances raised by the complainant and providing appropriate remedies and compensation is crucial to ensure justice in this case. The opposite party must be held accountable for their actions and the harm caused to the complainant. The evidence presented strongly supports the complainant's claims, and it is only just and fair to grant her the relief she is seeking, including nominal compensation and costs.
In the result we are of the view that the complaint is only to be allowed in the interest of justice. Therefore, the complaint is allowed and the opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.1,884/- together with interest @ 12% per annum and compensation of Rs.5,000/- for the losses suffered and Rs.2,000/- as costs of the proceedings. The interest for the aforementioned amounts shall be calculated from the date of the complaint until they are fully realized by the complainant. The opposite party is directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order failing which the complainant can initiate execution proceedings.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt. Minimol S. transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission this the 31st day of July 2023.
Sd/-
STANLY HAROLD
MEMBER
Sd/-
S.K.SREELA
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
S.SANDHYA RANI
MEMBER
Forwarded/byOrder
Senior superintendent
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Nil
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext.P1 : Complaint lodged before the Cyber cell, Kollam.
Ext.P2 series : email communications.
Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for opposite party:-Nil
Sd/-
PRESIDENT
