Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 551.

                                                                   Instituted on     : 20.09.2017.

                                                                   Decided on       : 07.02.2019.

Rakesh, age 30 years, son of Sh. Surender Singh, Resident of V.P.O.-Bhalout, District Rohtak.

                                                                             ………..Complainant.

                             Vs.

Naaptol India Headquarters, HQ No.11, Conopus, Kabra Galaxy Star- 1 CHS, Brahmand, Azad Nagar, Thane West, Maharashtra-400607 through its General Manager.

……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   SMT. SAROJ BALA BOHRA, MEMBER.

                   SH.VED PAL, MEMBER.

Present:       Sh. Parveen Phogat, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Smt. Usha Girotra, Advocate for the opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                          Brief facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a Juicer & Slicer Combo + Free multi Cutter with Peeler sku 11655 and Freight charges for the consideration of Rs.1,098/- from the opposite party on 31.07.2017. On 18.08.2017 a call from mobile No. 7091544272 came on complainant’s mobile and caller introduced himself as employee of the OP and he further said that all the buyers of OP had been included in Lottery and as the complainant had made purchasing from the OP, his name was included in draw and he has won Tata Safari in the lottery and it was said that either he choose tata safari or its value amounting Rs.12,60,000/- and asked him to deposit Rs.8,500/- in account bearing No.20382078507 which is in the name of Sunil Paswan, an employee of OP and Rs.25,000/- in account No. 323417134 which is in the name of other employee Sajjan Kumar of the OP. It is alleged that the complainant said that the caller was playing fraud with him, on this caller gave all the details of the order of OP. That complainant believed the talk of the caller and deposited the said amount in SBI, Rohtak on 18.08.2017. After this another call from mobile No.7463846689 came and complainant was asked to deposit Rs.37,800/- on the above mentioned numbers. On this, complainant’s belief was confirmed that a fraud has been played with him, so, he asked to return the amount of Rs.33,500/-. On this, the caller said that by enticing like such type of lottery, they are cheating people and denied to return the money. It is further alleged that the detail of order was only in the knowledge of the OP and it has intentionally been leaked to the caller/employees of OP who made phone calls to the complainant. That the act of opposite party is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. As such, it is prayed that OP may kindly be directed to pay Rs.33,500/- to the complainant which the opposite party has got deposited from the complainant and Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.

2.                          After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that after receiving the order from the complainant, opposite party forwarded the order to the concerned seller for the purpose of sale and delivery and the item was dispatched by the seller and the same was delivered on 31.07.2017. That to their utter shock and surprise, the Customer Care Executives are receiving various complaints from the number of customers that they have deposited amount/s in Bank Accounts- having Personal Name/s. It is further submitted that OP has already lodged police complaints and FIR in various police stations in respect of above said crime although investigation is going on. That the complainant has not deposited any amount in the name of company and the same is deposited in the personal bank accounts of Sunil Paswan and Sajjan Kumar. That respondent has not intentionally leaked Customer data. That complainant has no cause of action against the company and opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

3.                          Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and has closed his evidence on dated 20.08.2018. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R7 and has closed his evidence on dated 15.10.2018.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully

 5.               After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that as per the copy of complaint placed on record Ex.C1, the order ID no.37959491 was issued by the respondent at the time of purchase of product by the complainant from the respondent and the complainant received  phone calls from a mobile no.7091534272 who assured that the complainant had won some prize in a lottery due to purchase of product from the opposite party company. The alleged person also told the whole information regarding the order ID issued by the opposite party, due to which complainant believed the same and had deposited the amount of Rs.33500/- on dated 18.08.2017 in the accounts of Sunil Paswan and Sanjjan Kumar who told themselves the employees of opposite party and the deposit of amount is proved from the copy of deposit slips Ex.C3 and Ex.C4. Now the question arises that how they get the detail of order ID of the complainant?.

6.                          In this regard it is observed that opposite party in its reply and affidavit has admitted that Customer Care Executives are receiving various complaints from the number of customers that they have deposited amount/s in Bank Accounts having Personal Names. But the contention of opposite party is that the respondent has not intentionally leaked Customer data. In this regard it is observed that the opposite party failed to protect its data due to which the hackers contacted the customers and cheated them. It is the grave responsibility of the company to keep the data safe in all respect from the hackers. The personal information and account details etc. should not be leaked. The complainant had only get ready to deposit the money when the persons told the order ID and personal details of the complainant which were only between the complainant and respondent. As the opposite party had failed to protect the data of the complainant, hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant.

7.                          In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is hereby allowed and it is directed that opposite party shall refund the amount of Rs.33500/-(Rupees thirty three thousand five hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e.20.09.2017 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.

8.                         Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

07.02.2019.

                                                          ................................................

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

                                                          …………………………………

                                                          Ved Pal, Member.

                                                          ……………………………….

                                                                        Saroj Bala Bohra, Member.