Haryana

Karnal

CC/131/2023

Ashish Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

NYKAA FASHION Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Lalit Kansal

30 Sep 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No.131 of 2023

                                                        Date of instt.24.02.2023

                                                        Date of Decision: 30.09.2024

1. Ashish Gupta son of Mahavir Gupta, resident of house no.188, Sector-14, Karnal.
2. Richa Gupta wife of Shri Ashish Gupta, resident of house no.188, Sector-14, Karnal.

                                                                        …….Complainants.

                                              Versus

Nykaa Fashion Pvt. Ltd. registered office address 104, Vasan Udhyog Bhavan, Sunmil Compound, Tulsi Pipe Road, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013, through its authorized signatory/person.

                                                                        …..Opposite Party.

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

              Ms. Neeru Agarwal…….Member

      Ms. Sarvjeet Kaur…..Member

 Argued by: Shri Lalit Kansal, counsel for the complainants.

                    Shri Himanshu Sandhu, counsel for the OP.

                     (Sarjeet Kaur, Member)

ORDER:   

                  The complainants have filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that OP is running an online retain shopping App under the name and style Nykaa Fashion and allured the complainants for purchase of items from the abovesaid app and offered for return policy in case of the time so purchased through the app will not found suitable or of inferior quality or for any other reason or even without any reason, if the request of return is made within 30 days of its delivery. Complainant under the influence and allurement of quality of products as well as the policy of return made orders of certain items to the OP which are as following:-

The  complainants had purchased the abovesaid products, vide mobile no.9896678913 and email ID

2.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that complainant placed the orders of the following items and the same was delivered at the address of the complainant. The details of which are as under:-

Thereafter, complainant placed the return request against the above-mentioned orders, which the following return IDs were generated:

Upon receipt of the complainant’s return request raised with respect to each order mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, the customer support team of the OP conducted thorough enquires internally and it was discovered that the complainants have a history of conspicuously high return and the same has raised warnings with the OP’s customer support team on the registered account of the complainants. Upon conducting the enquiries, it was discovered from the complainants’ order history that the complainants are serial returners and that there have been sequential irregularities with their past orders as well as i.e. the complainants’ previously on multiple occasions have returned local/duplicate or counterfeit products instead of the original products delivered to them. The actions of the complainants fall under the category of ‘Return/Refund Abuse’ i.e. misusing OP’s return policy. The complainants have been taking undue advantage of the OP’s return and refund policy. It is further pleaded that Nykaa Fashion is one of the largest online ecommerce platforms in India which intends to provide its premium curated collection of designer wear both women and men. The online platform commenced in operation in 2018 and today Nykaa Fashion has more than five million customers, with 1500+ brands and over 1.8 million products across five consumer segments that are available on its website and mobile app. The allegations leveled by the complainants are not only without an iota of evidence but are based on concocted and fabricated stories and are devoid of merits. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainants has tendered into evidence affidavit of Richa i.e. complainant no.2 Ex.CW1/A, copy of bill dated 22.01.2023 Ex.C1, copy of Return Request Cancelled Ex.C2, copy of bill dated 23.01.2023 Ex.C3, copy of Return request Ex.C4, copy of bill dated 23.01.2023 Ex.C5, copy of return request Ex.C6, copy of bill dated 24.01.2023 Ex.C7, copy of return request Ex.C8, copy of bill dated 24.1.2023 Ex.C9, copy of return request Ex.C10, copy of emails dated 30.01.2023 and 03.02.2023 Ex.C11 and Ex.C12, photographs of product Ex.C13 and closed the evidence on 11.09.2023 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Mr. Vaibhav Mehta Ex.OP1/A and closed the evidence on 08.05.2024 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainants, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainants  purchased (online) some products from the OP, for the consideration of Rs.16088/-. The products purchased by the complainants were of inferior quality so that complainants applied for return of products and refund of amount, under return policy of the OP but OP rejected the return request of the complainants and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that complainants are habitual returner. Firstly, they placed the order and then return the local or counterfeit product instead of the original products. Complainants are misusing the return policy of the OP and taking the undue advantage of the OP’s return policy and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, complainant placed orders to purchase the various items from the OP, for the consideration of Rs.16088/-. It is also admitted that complainant placed the return request to the OP.

11.           OP has alleged that complainant is a habitual returner and taking the undue advantage of the return policy of the OP. Complainant firstly place multiple orders and post delivery of the products they raised return/raise requests and thereafter return the local/counterfeit product instead of original. OP has alleged that true copies of the complainant’s prior order history alongwith return abuse reports flagged by the customer support team of the OP are placed on file as Annexure-4. The onus to prove its case was relied upon the OP but OP has miserably failed to prove the same by leading any cogent and convincing evidence. On perusal of the file, it reveals that neither OP attached the alleged annexures with the written version nor tendered during the course of evidence. In the written version, OP has allegedly mentioned five annexures attached with the written version but OP has not annexed a single annexure as alleged by them. It appears that OP without attaching the alleged annexures have mentioned in its written version. OP neither accept the return request nor refunded the cost of the products. Thus, the act of OP for not-returning the products or not refunding the price of the products amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice                

12.           The complainant purchased the products for an amount of Rs.16088/-, hence, the complainant is entitled for refund of the said amount alongwith compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses, etc.

13.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.16088/- (Rs.sixteen thousand eighty eight only) to the complainant.  We further direct the OP to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. The complainants are also directed to return the all the articles purchased by them. This order shall be complied with within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated: 30.09.2024

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Neeru Agarwal)         (Sarvjeet Kaur)

                   Member                          Member