BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.185 of 2024
Date of Instt. 21.05.2024
Date of Decision: 26.09.2024
Tanya aged about 27 years daughter of Sh. Upinder Kumar R/o 48-A, Raja Garden Colony, Mithapur Chowk, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
JIO Mart, 3rd Floor, Court House, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai-400002, through its mobile application JIO MART.
….….. Opposite Party
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Mr. Upinder Kumar on behalf of the Complainant.
OP exparte.
Order
Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that she used the JIO MART mobile app provided by the OP, which is an Indian e-commerce company focusing on online groceries sales and other product categories such as fashion, home essentials, electronics, and lifestyle products. After checking different products listed in the mobile application of JIO MART, she decided to purchase Redmi Note 12 5G, 8GB RAM, 256GB ROM, Mystique Blue, Smartphone. She after successfully reviewing all the billing details, placed a prepaid order of 15,990.00 via online UPI payment mode using CRED Pay application, dated on 11th April 2024 at 8:55 am. She was given the expected delivery date on its shipping address between 16th to 17th April 2024. However she received a text message on her registered mobile number from XPRESSBEES, which is delivery partner of the OP i.e JIO MART, on 14th April 2024 at 11:39 am that the package is out for delivery and along with a delivery code to be given to the delivery executive when package will be delivered. The delivery agent arrived around 12:40 pm at her house and handed over the package after taking the delivery code. She asked the delivery agent to open the package to confirm the right product was delivered but the delivery executive refused to do so saying that JIO MART does not allow an open package delivery. The package was handed over to her and for which she received a text message saying the package was delivered on the registered mobile number. She then opened the package and recorded the whole scene on her sister's mobile phone and after opening she found 3 jars of Amla Candy instead of the mobile phone in the box. Then she called on the customer care number of JIO Mart i.e. 1800 890 1222 and raised the concern to their customer care executives. They confirmed on the call that the request will be handled and a refund will be initiated once the return pickup is done in the next 5 days. They told her to wait till the return is done for any further info. On 16th April, she used the social media network to raise her concern by posting the proofs and status on X, previously known as Twitter by also tagging the official name handles of JIO Mart. To this the JIO Mart account replied by asking the details of the account id and the order id. She replied to these queries and received a response saying that a ticket is already open for the same and asked her to track the same. On 18th April she received a text message on the registered mobile number saying that the query has been resolved to confirm which she again called on Jio Mart's customer care number to which they said that their backend team closed the request rejecting it. She asked them to reopen the request and check again all the proofs that she had submitted. To this they agreed and reopened the ticket. Between 16th to 18th April, she again raised her concerns on the same X tweet and also received a response from the JIO Mart team. On 20th April again her request was rejected by JIO MART as confirmed by their customer executive and OPs team on call. After talking to them on call for several minutes they said to reopen the ticket and wait for 5 more days. As a result of this after asking them to reopen the ticket, she also raised a complaint in the Consumer helpline with docket number 5708257. On 22nd April she again received a text message saying the query was resolved, and again talking to the OPS executive of the JIO MART team said that the request was again rejected as they talked to the seller and he said he did send the mobile in the package. She asked them to show her the proof the sender gave them which confirmed that the package was indeed sent. She also raised the point that she was not provided with any bill in her account of JIO MART via app or browser or via my registered phone number, also no bill was found in the package too. On 25th April she sent out an email to cs@jiomart.com grievanceofficer@jiomart.com and nodalofficer@jiomart.com writing all the details and attaching all the proofs again. She also asked them to provide a valid bill for this order. She received a reply to the email mentioned in point 12, On 26th April in which they stated that they did not find any issue with the package delivered and also sent her the bill. In response to the email in point 6, she asked them to track the phone using the IMEI number in the bill and help in finding the phone. To this email they again refused her request in email and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to return the order payment of Rs.15,999/- by the OP with immediate effect. Further, OP be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, but despite service the OP failed to appear and ultimately, the OP was proceeded against exparte.
3. In order to prove her respective version, the complainant herself has produced on the file their respective evidence.
4. We have heard complainant in person and have also gone through the case file very minutely.
5. In nutshell, the case of the complainant is that after checking list of different products listed in the mobile application of JIO MART, he decided to purchase Redmi Note 12 5G, 8GB RAM, 256 GB ROM, Mystique Blue, Smartphone and placed a prepaid order of Rs.15,990/- via online UPI payment mode using CRED on 11.04.2024. On 14.04.2024 complainant received a text message from the Xpressbees, which is delivery partner of the OP i.e. Jio Mart that packages out for delivery and also given a delivery code. The delivery agent arrived and handedover the packet to complainant. On asking the delivery agent to open the packet to confirm that right product, but he refused by saying that Jio Mart does not allow to open packet delivery. After receiving packet, complainant opened the package and recorded the whole scene on mobile phone and found 3 jars of Amla Candy instead of mobile phone in the box. When the complainant immediately raised a return request from Jio Mart mobile application and after this the order started showing under return process. The screenshot of the same is produced on record as Ex.C-11. When the complainant called on customer care number of Jio Mart 1800 890 1222 and raised the concern then their executive replied that a refund will be initiated once the return pickup is done in next five days. On 16.04.2024 complainant posted the proofs and status on X previously known as Twitter also telling the official mode Jio Mart. To this the Jio Mart asked many queries which complainant replied and complainant received response that a ticket is already opened for the same. The screenshots of conversation is Ex.C.12. On 18.04.2024, the complainant received the text message that query has been resolved and also the request is closed. On many requests he/OP opened the ticket many times and then rejected the claim by saying that sender confirmed that package delivered. On 25.04.2024 complainant sent an email to cs@jiomart.com grievanceofficer@jiomart.com and nodalofficer@jiomart.com writing all the details and attaching all the proofs again, but complainant’s issue not resolved.
6. By going through the facts and emails placed on the file, it is clear that complainant has received a wrong product to which Jio Mart acknowledged in their emails and also agreed to resolve the issue in email, but OP neither replaced the phone nor refund the payment. So, deficiency of OP is proved and complaint is partly allowed and OP is directed to pay the amount of the mobile i.e. Rs.15,900/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of purchase till its realization. Further, OP is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant for causing mental tension and harassment. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
7. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Jyotsna Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
26.09.2024 Member Member President
