Delhi

New Delhi

CC/512/2013

SHAILENDER JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

NAAPTOL ONLINE SHOPPING P. LTD. ADITYA INFOTEK - Opp.Party(s)

03 Jun 2016

ORDER

 

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI),

 ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

 NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

Case No.C.C./512/2013                                                                                                             Dated:

In the matter of:

SH. SHAILENDER JAIN,

House No. 4378/4B,

Ansari Road, Darya Ganj,

Delhi-110 002

 

        ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1.      ADITYA INFOTECH 

        Managing Director,

        Naaptol online Shopping (P) Ltd.,

       118, 1^st Floor,Sushant Tower,

       Sector-56, Sushant Lok-II,

       Gurgaon-122003

               .... OPPOSITE PARTY-I

2.     The Managing Director,

        Naaptol Online Shopping Pvt. Ltd.,

        118, 1^st Floor, Sushant Tower, Sector-56,

Sushant Lok-II, Gurgoan-122003

.....OPPOSITE PARTY-2

 

PRESIDENT: S.K. SARVARIA

 

ORDER

                By this order we shall decide whether this complaint case should continue or should be closed or treated as disposed off.  The brief facts giving rise to the present complaint are that a defective ‘16GB Spy Pen Video Camera’ was sold to the complainant by the OP for consideration of Rs. 1649/-. The complainant knocked the door of different authorities for redressal of grievances when the OP did not care to redress the grievance of the complainant, but is void, Hence the present complaint.  The notice of the complaint was issued to the OPs and OP-2 filed WS and also later filed an application on 22/8/14, without prejudice to contentions in WS, for permission to refund of price of 16GH Spy Pen Camera i.e. Rs. 1649/-.  Later, on 24/4/15 a Demand Draft dated 22/4/15 No. 14828 in sum of Rs. 25,000/- was given on behalf of OPs in full and final compliance of the settlement and also  compliance of direction of this District Forum for advertisement of all leading news papers.  The complainant is received the DD of Rs. 25,000/-.

In the backdrop of the above undisputed facts contention on behalf of the OPs is that the defective Spy Pen Camera was worth Rs. 1649/-.  The complainant is amply compensated by paying of Rs. 25,000/- by DD in question so complaint should be closed and treated as settled. 

On behalf of the complainant this request of Ops is strongly objected on the ground that the complainant has been harassed by the OPs and complainant had to approach different authorities against the OPs.  It is argued that in such cases some social message should be given and further compensation should be awarded to the complainant or some social organization so that OP may not sell defected products to anybody else.    We have considered the respective arguments carefully.  It is the complaint filed by the complainant against the OPs for redressal of his grievances against the defective camera purchased by the complainant from the OP for Rs. 1649/-.  Therefore, we cannot treat this complaint filed by an individual in individual capacity for individual grievance as a complaint filed in representative capacity.  For loss on account of buying the defective product worth Rs. 1649/- the complainant has already received amount from OP which is 16 times more than the loss suffered by the complainant on account of purchase of the said product i.e. 16GB Spy Pen Camera.  Therefore, we feel that the complainant has been compensated adequately and continuation the present proceeding further would be abuse of process of court, more so, when the OP in compliance of directions of this District Forum has also advertised its products by giving its proper address and particulars in the daily News Paper Jagran. Copies of the said news paper are already filed. 

        Once a sum of Rs. 25,000/- is received by the complainant from the OP which was sought to be paid by OP in full and final settlement, the complainant cannot back track and demand continuation of his case he is estopped by his conduct to continue with the complaint.

In view of the above,  we treat the present case has closed  and decided in terms of order dated 24/4/15 when OP has given payment by DD of Rs. 25,000/- to the complainants towards full and final settlement.

This order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy of this order each be sent to both parties by registered post free of cost.

The file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 03.06.2016.

 

 

(S K SARVARIA)

PRESIDENT

 

(NIPUR CHANDNA)

MEMBER