Present         :           Sh. Arif Qureshi, Advocate, Counsel for complainant.

            Sh. Amar Vivek, Advocate, Counsel for Opposite Parties No. 1    & 2.

            Opposite Parties No. 3 & 4 (already discharged)

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A (Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1. The complainants filed present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties and they alleged that on 23rd of July 2019, the complainant No.2 visited Google search to gather information about the processing of returning the Gas Cylinder. There she came across Google maps page where information of Opposite Parties was advertised/displayed and a Mobile Number was mentioned. The complainant alleged Mobile Number mentioned online and made a call to that number. The phone was answered by male person, who stated that he is speaking on behalf of Praveen, Gas Agency, Sector 11-D, Chandigarh. Then the complainant No. 2 told him that she want to know about the procedure of returning the Gas Cylinder. In response to the said query the person on the phone replied, this can be done and the security amount shall be refunded to the concerned bank account. In order to complete this process, the bank account of beneficiary must be linked to the Praveen Gas Agency. He further stated that this is very simple process, a link will be sent to her Mobile and she just need to open the Web link and the bank account will be linked to the Praveen, Gas Agency and refund will be credited in beneficiaries account. The phone call was disconnected after those instructions. Within a few minutes she received a link on her Mobile, and as soon as she open the link amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(one lac only) was deducted from her bank account in 10 successive transactions. The screenshots of the said link and message received regarding deduction of amount from her bank account are attached with the complaint as annexure C3. The complainant No.2 was awestruck and bewildered at the occurrence, she tried to make some sense of things and tried the Mobile Number again several times, but in vain, person did not pick up the calls.  She then realised that she has been tricked by some online scammer. She with a motive of warning others about the scam going on online information page of the OP No. 1 and 2, visited the reviews page to write a review, and there, she found several people who were already duped by the same trickster in the same/similar manner. Thereafter the complainant moved a complaint to L.d. SSP, Chandigarh and cyber cell Chandigarh regarding online fraud. Complainant No.2 was called by Chandigarh police for preliminary investigation and an FIR No. 251 dated 08-08-2019 was registered by Chandigarh Police, Sector 17 Police Station. The complainant also moved a complaint to the Opposite Party No. 1 regarding the failure to check and correct the information provided on their online attachment. It was alleged that Opposite Parties have failed to do anything in this regard till the registration of FIR and the Mobile Number of Online trickster was removed very late, which has resulted in this great loss to the complainant and several others. The complainant alleged that if the Opposite Parties had been slightly more vigilant and aware regarding the online information. This all could have been easily avoided. No advisory or warning was ever issued by the owner of the Praveen, Gas Agency in any manner whatsoever. The Opposite Party No.3 and 4 were also liable for this loss to the complainants as they had a duty to remove and take proper action regarding the information provided on the online pages. The present mishap is the result of collective failure on the part of the Opposite Parties. Lastly, complainant prayed for the directions to OP to pay compensation of amount of Rs.2,00,000/-(Two lac only) and refund of Rs.1,00,000/-(one lac only) along with interest and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After the service of notice upon the Opposite Parties, the Opposite Parties a appeared through their Counsel before this commission and filed a written version to the complainant taking preliminary objections that the complainant does not come within the definition of consumer as there is no allegation of unfair trade, practice, deficiency in service or restrictive trade practice; the complainant’s were themselves, negligent and careless as they respond to fake phone calls and became susceptible to cyber frauds due to lack of care and caution on their part, whereas there is no role, overt or otherwise of the opposite parties in the whole matter, Complainant No.2 wanted to return the Gas Cylinder and instead of calling the stipulated telephone number(9781324365) mentioned in the customers copy which has been Annexure as C-1 at page number 14 of the complaint  she visited the Google maps on 23rd of July 2019 and called on the Mobile Number 9102764886 which was the fraudulent website and the Phone Number of some cyber fraudster who has been involved in the online fraud and has otherwise not even remotest Link, Association or connection with the answering opposite parties at all, rather these fraudsters had created fake identity, akin to the name of the answering Opposite Parties and complainant at his own respond to them and in the process she was cheated by them. They complainants have themselves lodged a Criminal complaint and this fraudsters have since been identified by the police as someone named as Shamim Ansari from Jharkhand and Rishi Tandon from Noida U.P which fact has been clearly mentioned at the page number 40 and 42 of the complaint, and it is further clear and evident that the same Fraudsters cheated and Duped the complainant and instead of pursuing case against these fraudsters, the complainant have sought to prosecute the answering opposite parties, by way of present complaint, whereas there is no cause of action against the answering Opposite Parties, due to which, the present matter does not fall within the preview of the consumers protection Act.; neither the answering Opposite Party have their own website nor that Mobile Number belongs to them ; moreover, much before the present incident of fraud, the Opposite Parties on 20th June 2019, vide Exhibit R-2/1 colly, themselves wrote a complaint to the SSP Police Headquarter, Sector- 9, Chandigarh, about the online cyber fraud, being committed upon answering Opposite parties by the fraudsters person by using the  above said Mobile Number as  the answering Opposite parties reliably learnt about the same and the said complaint of answering  Opposite parties were prior in time to the incident that occurred with the complainants. Similarly, the answering Opposite Parties also took steps to approach the Google and got the fraud, attachment removed and took all the other reasonable steps. The fact however, remains that the whole incident is criminal in nature and the responsibility to remove the phone number of Fraudsters in any case was that of the Google or of the police and the matter falls within the ambit of Cyber Crime and Police investigation as the present complaint is not maintainable before this commission. On merits opposite parties denied all the allegations made against them and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with heavy costs for making false and irresponsible allegations against the answering opposite parties.
3. Replication has also been filed by the complainant thereby controverting the assertions of OP made in its heir reply.

4.     Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.     We have heard the Counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

The main issue involved in the present complaint is whether opposite parties are deficient while rendering service to the complainant or not ?

6. The Opposite Parties No. 1 and 2 has taken a reasonable care and caution by making a written complaint to the SSP, Police Headquarter, Sector-9, Chandigarh on 20.06.2019 about the online Cyber fraud being committed by the fraudster person as the answering O.P.s reliably learnt about the same and the above said complaint was prior in time to the incident that occurred with the complainants. Moreover, Complainant No. 2 instead of calling on the stipulated Mobile Number (9781324365) mentioned in the customers copy which was duly annexed as Annexure C-1 at page No. 14 of the complaint by the complainants themselves, Complainant No. 2 visited Google Map page and fall in the trap of the fraudsters without knowledge and consent of Opposite Parties No. 1 and 2. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the complaint, it can safely be concluded that it is a case of fraud and cheating belonging to cyber crime and there is no deficiency in service, Unfair trade practice or restrictive trade practice adopted by the opposite parties.
7. So, it is very clear that on 23rd of July 2019, complainant No. 2 at her own visited at Google maps page where the information of the Opposite Parties was advertised/ displayed and a Mobile Number was mention, but at the same time it is evident that this page was not created by the opposite party but some fraudster who send a link to the complainant and when the complainant no .2 visited that link then she lost an amount of Rs 1,00,000/-( one lakh) from her bank account in 10 successive transactions. She soon realised that she was tricked by some online scammer/Fraudster. The complainant moved a complaint to the learned SSP, Chandigarh and cyber cell. Chandigarh. Regarding this online fraud and FIR No 251 dated 8th of August 2019 registered by the Police at Sector -17, Police Station, Chandigarh. The police in their investigation identified the names of the fraudsters as Shamim Ansari from Jharkhand and Rishi, Tandon from Noida UP and this fact has been clearly mentioned at page number 40 and 42 of the complaint. The complainant failed to prove that there is any remotest link, connection or association of the opposite parties with these fraudsters. Moreover, the opposite parties have made written complaints against these fraudster to the SSP police dated 20th of June 2019 which is on record as Exhibit- R2/1.

Taking into account the above mentioned discussion & finding, it can safely concluded that there is neither deficiency in service nor Unfair Trade Practice adopted by O.P.s. Hence, the present complaint is dismissed being without any merits.

8. The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
9. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission.

Date:

Place: Chandigarh.

(Amrinder Singh Sidhu)

                                                                                          PRESIDENT

                                                                                          (B.M. SHARMA)

                                                                                          MEMBER.

C.k