FINAL ORDER/JUDGMENT

Presented by:

Minakshi Chakraborty,  Presiding Member.

Brief facts of the case: This case has been filed U/s. 34(1), 34(2D), 35,36,39 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 by the complainant stating that the complainant had an account with the respondent and used to order products by using that and on 18^th November 2020 the complainant  ordered an Acer Nitro Laptop worth Rs.53,989/- vide order ID: 403 – 2540527 -97 7960 from the respondent’s website and paid for the same and on the delivery the complainant had received a punching bag in place of Laptop and on the immediate basis the complainant intimated this issue to the respondent department and asked for the return of the wrong product and also claimed for a refund and the complainant’s  claim also got approved by the respondent’s end and at the time of pick up, the pick up person denied to take the product back and advised the complainant to talk with the customer service executive and accordingly, the complainant talked with the respondent’s person and the complainant was asked to wait till 5^th December 2020 for the resolution but nothing happened to date and the complainant was informed by the respondent’s department that nothing could be done regarding the issue and no refund would be initiated to complainant as the respondent’s men and agent delivered the exact product the complainant although the complainant has the confirmation regarding acceptance of refund procedure by the respondent’s end and from then the complainant tried to contact the respondent and the respondent’s department and but no response was found from the respondent’ ends and no appropriate help and support was provided to him from the respondent’s side.

Complainant has filed the complaint petition praying direction upon the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 53,989/- to refund back and to pay sum of Rs.1,5000/- as a compensation for the deficiency in service and mental harassment and agony and to pay the litigation cost.

Evidence on record

The complainant filed evidence on affidavit which is nothing but replica of complaint petition and supports the averments of the complainant in the complaint petition.

Argument highlighted by the ld. Lawyers

Complainant have filed written notes of argument. As per BNA the evidence on affidavit and written notes of argument of complainant shall have to be taken into consideration for disposal of the instant proceeding.

            Heard argument of complainant at length. In course of argument ld. Lawyer of complainant has given emphasis on evidence and documents produced by the complainant.

From the discussion hereinabove, we find the following issues/points for consideration.

Issues/points for consideration

1. Whether the complainant is the consumer?
2. Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the case?
3. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief?

DECISION WITH REASONS

Issue no.1:

     In the light of the discussion hereinabove and from the materials on record, it transpires that the complainant is a Consumer as provided by the spirit of Section 2 (7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.The point is thus answered in the affirmative.  

Issue no.2:

                         The complainant is a resident within the district of Hooghly and the claims do not exceed the pecuniary limit of this commission. This point is thus disposed of accordingly.

Issue nos. 3 & 4:

Both the issues are taken up simultaneously for the sake of convenience.

Though the notice has duly been served upon the opposite party, but inspite of receiving notice the opposite party did not turn up resulting which the case is running ex parte against the O.P.

Now the case in a nutshell is that the complainant intends to purchase one laptop through amazon for which he paid Rs 53989/by way of using visa card and the order was placed on 18/11/2020(copy annexed),tax invoice was also generated by smart pc solution (copy annexed) for the same. From the shipment details filed by the complainant, it is evident that the item was delivered on 24/11/2020.

As per submission of the complainant the complainant had received a punching bag in place of Laptop and on the immediate basis the complainant intimated this issue to the respondent department and asked for the return of the wrong product and also claimed for a refund and the complainant’s claim also got approved by the respondent’s end. But at the time of pick up, the pick up person denied to take the product back and advised the complainant to talk with the customer service executive and accordingly, the complainant talked with the respondent’s person and the complainant was asked to wait till 5^th December 2020 for the resolution but nothing happened till date. But to substantiate his case no evidence has been brought by the complainant with regard to correspondence by and between the complainant and the pick up person, nor any evidence has been adduced by him to show that the customer service executive had advised the complainant to wait till 5^th December 2020.Only one paper has been annexed with the case where from it reflects that “THE SELLER HAS INITIATED THE REFUND FOR YOUR ORDER 403-2540527-9757960. The seller authorized the request on 24.11.2020” and another correspondence dated15/12/2020 where it has been written you’re your return for Amazon order 403-2540527-9757960”. But what feed back with regard to resolving the issue was submitted by the complainant that is not evident from any annexures. More so, it is not at all clear whether the complainant had actually received the punching bag instead of the laptop  or not. But fact remains that the amazon has initiated the refund for order placed by the complainant and as none appeared for and on behalf of amazon to show that payment has already been made by them or not the adverse presumption may be drawn in this instant case.

Both the issues are thus disposed of.

Hence

ordered

that the complaint case no. 34 of 2021 be and the same is decreed ex parte against the O.P.

The complainant do get return of Rs 53989/ alongwith Rs.10000/  for mental agony and harassment and Rs 10000/ for deficiency in service from the O.P within 45 days from date failing which the complaint is at liberty to take recourse to law.

Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary post for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will be available in the following website www.confonet.nic.in.