Orissa

Cuttak

CC/170/2023

ANAND KUMAR SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

IMAGINE MARKETING LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

self

14 Mar 2024

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C No.170/2023

 

Anand Kumar Sharma,

Law Scholar

S/o: Late Hari Kishan Sharma,

Plot No.C1176,Sector-6,Markat Nagar,

Cuttack-753014,Odisha.                                              ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.                     Imagine Marketing Ltd.,

(manufacturer of BOAT brand of product)

Unit No.204 & 205,

                              2^nd Floor, D Wing & E Wing,

Corporate Avenue,Andheri Ghakopar Link Road,

                               Mumbai-400093,Maharastra.

 

2.                   The Nodal Officer,

Grievance Redressal Department,

O/O: Imagine Marketing India Ltd.,

Unit No.204 & 205,

                               2^nd Floor, D Wing & E Wing,

Corporate Avenue,Andheri Ghakopar Link Road,

                               Mumbai-400093,Maharastra.

 

3.    Patra Electronics

Plot No.8,Sector-6,Markat Nagar,

Cuttack-753014,Odisha

                 

4.    Mr. Subhash Rao,

The Showroom Manager,

C/o: Patra Electronics

Plot No.8,Sector-6,Markat Nagar,                               

                             Cuttack-753014,Odisha                                                           ...Opp.Parties

 

 

Present:           Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                    Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

             Date of filing:     26.05.2023

Date of Order:   14.03.2024

 

For the complainants:          Self.

For the O.Ps                 :        None.

 

 

Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.                        

Case of the complainant in short is that he had purchased a Blue Tooth Ear Bud of “Boat” brand on payment of Rs.1600/- to the O.P no.3 who is the dealer of O.Pno.1, the manufacturer of the said ear bud.  It is alleged by the complainant that due to defect in the said ear bud, he contacted the O.Ps to remove the defect in the said Ear Bud but the O.Ps did not rectify the same.   It is further alleged by the complainant that the O.Ps by this process have committed offence U/S-420,465,468,471,409,120B r/w 34 of IPC,1860.  Hence, the complainant has filed the present case with a prayer for the direction to the O.Ps to pay Rs.2 crore and other consequential reliefs.

The complainant has filed copies of some documents alongwith his complaint petition in order to prove his case.

2.       Having not preferred to contest this case, all the O.Ps have been set exparte vide order dt.4.9.2023.

3.       The points for determination in this case are as follows:

          i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Points no.I & ii.

Out of the three points, for the sake of convenience points no. i & ii are taken up together first for consideration here in this case.

The complainant alleged to have purchased a Blue Tooth Ear Bud from the O.P. No.3 on payment of Rs.1600/-.  But the complainant has not filed money receipt towards purchase of the said ear bud.  It is alleged by the complainant that the said Blue Tooth Ear Bud of “Boat” brand is a defective one, which was not replaced by the O.Ps.  But the complainant has neither filed money receipt of the said product nor has filed any warranty card in respect of the said Blue Tooth Ear Bud, which he had purchased from O.P no.3.   Hence, the complainant failed to prove his case.  Moreover, the complainant has alleged offence U/S-420,465,468,471,409, 120B r/w 34 of IPC,1860 which cannot be adjudicated before this Commission.  In view of the above, the case of the complainant is not maintainable before this Commission as well as the O.Ps are not found to be deficient in their service in any manner.  Accordingly, these two points go against the complainant.

Point No.iii.

          From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant being not maintainable, he is not entitled to get any relief.   Hence, it is so ordered;

                                                          ORDER

Case is dismissed exparte against the O.Ps and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 14^th day of March,2024 under the seal and signature of this Commission.         

                                                                       Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                        Member

 

                                                                           Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                   President