Date of Filing: 27.12.2019

Date of Disposal: 14.01.2020

          This Complaint is filed by the Complainant under Section 12 of the CP Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the Op No. 1, as the Op No. 1 did not refund the amount as paid by him towards the purchase of the product concerned from the Op No. 1 till filing of this Compliant.

          Today if fixed for admission hearing of this Complaint.

          We have heard the Complaint on the point of  its admissibility.       

          During admission hearing we have gone through the pleading from where it is evident that an Agent of the Op No. 1 came to the house of the Complainant on 26^th January, 2019 and represented about the features of the Op No. 1 along with giving assurance to provide financial assistance from the Finance Partner being Op No. 2. The Agent of the Op No. 1 further represented the features of the product and the said product would be available on EMI. It was stated by the Op No. 1 that the said EMI started from the month of April, 2019 and the Complainant is also empowered to cancel the said product at any point of time before the EMI starts i.e. within March, 2019. Upon such representation the Complainant agreed to purchase the said product. The Complainant purchased the said product namely k8 (Byju’s) DSSL from the agent of the Op No. 1 on 26^th January, 2019 of Rs. 52,000/- on EMI and the Op No. 2 finance the financial loan. The Complainant paid case amount of Rs. 2,000/- and it was scheduled that the balance amount was financed by the Op No. 2. Upon such condition, the Complainant took the product after putting endorsement in the Agreement in respect of the said product. Subsequently, the Complainant came to know about such false representation and found that the product concerned is not upto the mark as represented by the Agent of the Op No. 1 to the Complainant. Not only that the said product was not useful. The Complainant has returned back the said product but the Op No. 1 did not receive the same and again returned the said product to the Complainant. On 09.03.2019 the Complainant tried to cancel the Agreement over telephone along with effort was taken by him to send the tablet which was received which was received by the Op No. 1. The Complainant tried to communicate with the Op No. 1 through Email on several occasions to no effect. The Op No. 1 did not bother to respond the Emails of the Complainant. The Op No. 1 also did not reply to the written correspondences of the Complainant which reflects malafide intention as well as unfair trade practice on behalf of the Op No. 1. Till date they did not receive back the tablet which was provided by the Op No. 1 to the Complainant. The Complainant through his Ld. Advocate issued Legal notice on 23.09.2019. The same was duly received by the Op No. 1 but the Op No. 1 did not bother to reply the said letter. Due to such negligent act of the Op No. 1, the Complainant received a demand notice from the Op No. 2 through which the Op No. 2 demanded a sum of Rs. 49,279.44/-. According to the Complainant due to inaction and deficiency in service on behalf of the Op No. 1, such harassment, mental agony, loss of professional practice occurred, for which the Complainant is entitled to get compensation. As the grievance of the Complainant has not been redressed by the Op No. 1, having no other alternative the Complainant has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this Complaint, praying for direction upon the Op No. 1 to refund the amount of Rs. 49,279.44/- which has been taken from the Capital Float and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- which was taken at the time of Agreement and EMI amount of Rs. 4,166.67/- which was deducted from the Complainants Account to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- for litigation cost.

          We have carefully perused the entire documents, filed by the Complainant on which the Complainant has placed her reliance. Within the four corners of the documents as well as the Agreement, in which the Complainant and the Op No. 1 were entered into, there is no such Clause, based on which the Complainant can claim the refund of the paid amount to the Op No. 1. At the time of signing the Agreement both parties have put their endorsement therein and therefore as per the settled Law, none can travel beyond the terms and the conditions of the said Agreement. Due to non-existence of any clause for refund of the paid amount in the Agreement, now the Complainant cannot claim any amount towards the refund as paid by her to the Op No. 1. At the very outset this Ld. Forum is under obligation to adjudicate as to whether this Complaint is maintainable or not, as the Complainant has prayed for direction upon the Op No. 1 to  refund of the paid amount and where there is no clause on the strength of which we can direct the same, under these circumstances we are of the view that the Complaint cannot be maintainable.

          Going by the foregoing discussion, hence it is ordered that the Consumer Complaint being no. CC 210/2019 is hereby dismissed being not maintainable and without being admitted. There is no order as to cost.

          However, the Complainant is at liberty to approach before the Appropriate Forum/Court/Commission to resolve her dispute, if not barred otherwise.

           Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR, 2005.

         Dictated & Corrected by

[Hon’ble MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]

                   PRESIDENT