Delhi

North

CC/57/2020

VARUN MITTAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

JEEVES CONSUMER SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

01 Nov 2023

ORDER

 

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex,

Delhi- 110054

Consumer Complaint No. 57/2020

In the matter of

Mr.Varun Mittal

S/o Sh.K.K.Mittal

R/o 21/43, Shakti Nagar

Delhi-110027                                                                                                                     ...Complainant

                                                                                                 

Versus

Jeeves Consumer Services Private Ltd.

Through its Directors

Regd. Office

Buildings Alyssa, Begonia & Clove Embassy Tech Village

Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanshalli  Village Bengluru

Karnataka -560103                                                                                                          ... Opposite party-1

 

Flipkart Internet Private Ltd.

Regd. Office

Buildings Alyssa, Begonia & Clove Embassy Tech Village

Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanshalli  Village Bengluru

Karnataka -560103                                                                                                           ... Opposite party-2

 

                                                                                                                                   

ORDER

01/11/2023

Ms.Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member

            Jurisdiction of this Commission has been invoked by Sh. Varun Mittal, the Complainant against, Jeeves Consumer Services Pvt. Ltd. as OP-1, Flipkart Internet Pvt. Ltd. as OP-2, with the allegations of deficiency in services.

1. Facts necessary for the disposal of the present complaint are ,on 27/12/2018, the complainant purchased one 43 inches LED TV of brand “MI” and an extended warranty by the name “Flipkart protect extended warranty” valid for two years for a total sum of Rs.22,183/-.
2. It has been stated by the complainant that the TV had one year brand warranty and thereafter two year extended warranty from Flipkart Protect Extended warranty.  The complainant started facing problem in the speaker/screen etc. in the month of June 2020 for the first time for which the customer care of Flipkart was intimated. The complainant was informed that the extended warranty was handled by another company namely Jeeves (OP-1 herein). A complaint was registered with OP-1 vide complaint No.FREM-DW0TSS-B75ITV-NJP4JN-IVW756Q.  
3. The engineer of OP-1 informed the complainant that there was need to change the part for repair, and it will take 15 days for delivering the said part, thus he will put the complaint on hold. It has been alleged by the complainant that no one came to repair the TV after a lapse of 15 days for which again the customer care of OP-2 was contacted. There the complainant was informed that in case the part was not available in 20 days, then OP-2 will refund the amount of the TV as per their policy and requested the complainant to send an email with copy of bank passbook and invoice.  The complainant was also informed that he will get a refund of 80% of the total amount paid as per the policy.
4. Despite several calls and emails the amount was not refunded. On 31/08/2020, the complainant was again given case ID No.IVW756Q; however the refund was not initiated.
5.  Hence, the present complaint with the prayer for directions to OP to refund Rs.22,183/- along with interest @18% p.a. from the date of payment; compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.  The complainant has annexed the invoice dated 28/12/2018 of the TV and extended warranty; Flipkart protected extended warranty terms and conditions; screenshot of the message received from Flipkart, email dated 20/07/2020, 11/08/2020 and –/08/2020 along with the complaint.
6. Notice of the present complaint was issued to OPs.  Thereafter, written statement was filed on behalf of OP-1 and OP-2. 
7. In its written statement OP-1 has taken several objections such as: the said part of the LED TV has already been changed on 04/11/2020, thus the present complaint has become infructuous as there is no unresolved grievance. It has been submitted that OP-1 provides one stop service point for all electronics, electrical and IT products by offering cost effective, reliable and quick solution.  It also provides after sale support to major brand and online portal/large retails store like installation, repair services during warranty and out of warranty period for small and large electronic appliances. 
8. It has been admitted that the complainant had registered a complaint and the same was addressed by arranging for a technician visit.  It was found that there was an issue with the PCB unit of the product which required to be changed.  OP-1 tried to expedite resolution process however; it took some time to arrange another PCB unit as it was not easily available.   However, as soon as the said part was received, the technician of OP-1 visited the complainant and resolved the issue.  Hence, there was no deficiency in services. 
9. They have further submitted that as per para L of the terms and conditions which is as under :-

“While Jeeves promises to attend the defects for the product covered EW on priority, Jeeves shall not be responsible for delay in service and consequential loss if any to the customer”

10. They have further submitted that the manufacturer delayed in providing the parts which was beyond the control of OP-1, therefore, they cannot be held liable.  The complainant has not impleaded manufacturer as a party in the present complaint.  Rest of the contents of the complaint have been denied.
11. OP-2 has also filed their written statement where they have submitted that the complainant has failed to produce any documentary evidence with regard to the alleged deficiency. They have also submitted that OP-2 is neither the seller of any product nor a service provider with respect to extended warranty but it is an on-line intermediary providing a common platform.   They have also relied upon Section 79 of the Information Technology Act 2000 and Section 5(1) of Consumer Protection (E-commerce) Rules 2020 which also provides exemption to marketplace a E-commerce entity under Section 79(1), who comply with sub section (2) and (3) of Section 79. 
12. OP-2 does not directly or indirectly deal with selling of any product on Flipkart platform and the product and its extended warranty has not been sold by OP-2.  Rest of the content of the complaint have been denied for want of knowledge as well as being false and frivolous.   Another objection taken by OP-2 is there is no privity contract between complainant and them.
13. They have annexed the press note No.3 (2016 series) pertaining to guidelines for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on E-commerce as Annexure-I; Flipkart terms of use as Annexure-II with their written statement.  
14. Rejoinder to the written statement of OP-1 was filed by the complainant where it has been specifically denied that the said part of LED TV had been changed on 04/11/2020.  However, after the filing of the present complaint, one of the technicians of OP-1 visited the premises of the complainant, however, as the matter was sub-judice, complainant refused to get the repair done.  It has been denied that the manufacturer delayed in providing the parts which needed to be changed. Rest of the contents of the written statement have been denied and those of the complaint have been reiterated. 
15. Evidence by way of affidavit has been filed by the parties.  Complainant has got himself examined and has reiterated the contents of the complaint.  He has got exhibited the copy of the invoice for LED TV of Rs.20,768/- and copy of invoice of extended warranty of Rs.1415/-  as Ex.CW1/1 and Ex.CW1/2 respectively; copy of Flipkart protect extended warranty terms and conditions as Ex.CW1/3; copy of screenshot of SMS received by the complainant on his registered phone number as Ex.CW1/4; copy of email sent by complainant on different dates and on 20/07/2020, 11/08/2020 and 18/08/2020  as Ex.CW1/5 and Ex.CW1/6 (colly).  
16. The complainant has stated that in his affidavit that neither at the time of filing of the complaint i.e. 04/09/2020 nor at the time of filing of reply by OP-1 and OP-2 i.e. on 15/02/2021 the LED TV was repaired, therefore, there was a gross deficiency in services by OPs as well as breach of extended warranty scheme of OP-1.
17. Ms.Sheetal Tiwari, Authorised Signatory has been examined on behalf of OP-1 & OP-2.  The contents of the written statement of OP-1 & OP-2 have been repeated.  In evidence affidavit on behalf of OP-1, it has been reaffirmed that the part of the LED TV was already changed on 04/11/2020.  She has also reaffirmed the contents of the written statement on behalf of OP-2 and has got exhibited the copy of the press note as Ex.I and copy of the extract of the terms of use as Ex.II.
18. We have heard the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP-1 and OP-2 and have also perused the material placed on record.  The purchase of LED TV, extended warranty and registration of complaint with respect to non-working of the LED TV are not in dispute. 
19. The complainant is aggrieved by failure on part of OP-1 in delivering services during the validation of extended warranty period, whereas OP in their defence have stated that LED TV of the complainant was repaired on 04/11/2020, this has been denied by the complainant.  It is seen that the date of institution of the present complaint is 04/09/2020, and OP-1 merely stating that the part was replaced on 04/11/2020. OP-1 has filed nothing in support of their defence, in the absence of any document; this defence is to be discarded. Further, OP-1 has placed nothing on record to show that the delay was on the part of the manufacturer.
20. The factum that the complaint was registered with OP-1 in the month of June 2020 is not disputed. As per Ex.CW1/3 the extended warranty Flipkart  Protect  scheme terms and conditions Clause P which deals with service recovery policy for VAS at product level is being reproduced here under :-

Scenario	Policy terms	Service recovery
Service SLA breach (Excluding customer initiated breach)	Service SLA: 30 calendar days from the date of raising the claim	If there is a breach of 30 days then Jeeves will issue an EGV of Sum Assured Sum Assured: EW 1 year =80%ofPurchase Price   EW 2 years = 70% of Purchase Price

Herein SLA( Service Level Agreement) is defined as the total time elapsed between first on-sitevisit for repair to when the product is back in working condition after repair/replacement.

21. As per Clause B, defined terms  EW coverage start date: is the date after the expiry of the Manufacturer Warranty on the Cover Product and Sum Assured/Coverage Amount For 1 Year  Extended Warranty, it is 80% of the Purchase Price.  For 2 Years Extended Warranty, it is 80% of the Purchase Price in the 1^st year and 70% in the 2^nd year.  
22. Thus, it is clear that the OP-1 was unable to repair the product under Extended Warranty and as per Clause P (reproduced above), the complainant is entitled to recover 80% of the purchase price as the policy was in the 1^st year of the Extended Warranty.  Hence, there is clear cut deficiency in services on part of OP-1 as they have failed to deliver services as per the terms and conditions.  No deficiency in services can be alleged against OP-2 as they are mere facilitator/marketplace  and the extended warranty was to be executed by OP-1 only.
23. Therefore, in the facts and circumstance of the present complaint, we direct OP-1 :

1. To pay 80% of the invoice value of LED TV i.e. Rs.16,614/-.
2.  We also award interest @7% p.a. on Rs.16,614/- from the date of institution of the present complaint i.e. 04/09/2020 till realization
3. Compensation of Rs.12,500/- on account of mental agony and harassment, inclusive of litigation expenses.

This order is complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.In case of non-compliance Rs.29,114/-(a+c) shall carry interest @9% p.a. from the date of order till realization.

Office is directed to supply the copy of this order to the parties as per rules. Order be also uploaded on the website.  Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

(Harpreet Kaur Charya) Member

(Ashwani Kumar Mehta) Member

 

 

(Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)

                                             President