Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 446.
Instituted on : 24.08.2016.
Decided on : 08.03.2018.
Ajay Singh s/o Sh. Sanjay Rai R/o H.No.11, Type-5, Revenue Officer Colony, Sector-14, Rohtak Haryana.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Myntra.Com Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Khasra No.14//16,7,13,14,15,17,18,23,24,25,1//1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 12/1, 17//3, 4,5,6,7,8,11/2, 12, 13,14,15.
- Manager of Nike Shoe Head Office, UGF-27, City Centre Mall, MG Road, Gurgaon, Ph.0124-4009186.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.RAJBIR SINGH DAHIYA, PRESIDENT.
MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Naseeb Dalal, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party No.1 exparte.
Opposite party No.2 given up.
ORDER
KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER :
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he had purchased Nike Men Multicoloured Flyknit Max Running Shoes(620469-800) from opposite party No.1 from online shopping on 25.02.2015 vide order No.75352986 Invoice No.VEC-INV-75352986 amounting to Rs.15537/-. That the alleged shoes got defective after one month in shape of uncomfortability and not seems as original one. That complainant called to customer care to resolve the problem but they did not resolve the problem on the ground that they are not liable for the product. That the shoes are having air max as well as fluid unit inside but after one month the complainant’s shoes was without this air max unit and was only simple shoes which can be buy from local market in very less price. That due to the defective product of the opposite parties, it caused several problems in the complainant’s feet and he had to spent Rs.12000/- on his treatment and still he is under treatment. That the act of opposite parties of selling the defective product is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay Rs.15537/- with medical treatment charges of Rs.12000/-, Rs.20000/- for mental harassment and Rs.11000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties. Notice sent to opposite party No.1 through registered post not received back in any form. As such opposite party no.1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 13.02.2017 of this Forum. Opposite party No.2 was given up by the complainant being unnecessary party.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and has closed his evidence.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the complainant and have gone through the material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that as per bill Ex.C1, complainant had purchased pair of shoes online from the opposite party No.1 of Nike company i.e. opposite party No.2. As per complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant, the shoes were defective, not original one and without the air max unit and due to duplicate shoes provided by the opposite parties, complainant suffered pain in his shoes and spent money on treatment but despite his repeated requests, shoes were not replaced by the opposite parties. It is also on record that opposite party No.1 has not put up in appearance in its defence even though the summons were duly served to the opposite party no. 1 which indicates the malafide intention of opposite party. Non appearance of the opposite party No.1 before the Forum raises a presumption that it has nothing to say in the matter and as such all the allegations leveled by the complainant against the opposite party No.1 stands proved. Since the product in dispute was delivered by the opposite party No.1 to the complainant and the payment towards the cost of the product was also received by the opposite party No.1. Hence there is definitely a deficiency in service on the part of opposite party no.1. As such the complainant is entitled for the refund of price of shoes. As per the complaint, the complainant has claimed Rs.15537/- but the price of shoes as per invoice Ex.C1 is Rs.10537/-. Hence the complainant is entitled for this amount and complaint is allowed.
6. As such it is directed that complainant shall hand over the shoes in question to the opposite party No.1 and in turn opposite party No.1 shall refund the price of shoes i.e. Rs.10537/-(Rupees ten thousand five hundred thirty seven only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 24.08.2016 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.
7. 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:
08.03.2018.
................................................
Rajbir Singh Dahiya, President
..........................................
Komal Khanna, Member.
………………………………
Ved Pal, Member
