DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, CAMP COURT AT AMRITSAR, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : RBT/CC/2018/468

Date of Institution : 02.07.2018/29.11.2021

Date of Decision : 05.07.2022

Sh. Pawan Sharma Aged 41 years son of Sh. Baldev Raj Sharma R/o H. No. 3411/5, C/o Aarti Textiles, Alfa Lane, Batala Road, Amritsar (Punjab)-143001.  

  …Complainant

Versus

1. Paytm E Commerce Private Limited (N), B-121, Sector-5, Noida-201301 (Uttar Pradesh) GSTIN 09AAICP7471R1ZD through its authorized Signatory.

2. Divya Electronics 180, Pratap Nagar, Khudi Ram Bose Marg, Opposite Metro Pillar No. 9, Mayur Vihar Phase-1, New Delhi-110091 GSIN 07AAEFD6142L1ZD through its Partner.

…Opposite Parties

 

Complaint under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present: Sh. Pawan Sharma complainant in person. 

Sh. Manish Bansal Adv counsel for opposite party No. 1.

Sh. Deepinder Singh Adv counsel for opposite party No. 2.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President

2. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg  : Member

(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):

    The present complaint has been received by transfer from District Consumer Commission, Amritsar in compliance of the order dated 26.11.2021 of the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. The complainant filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act against Paytm E Commerce Private Limited, Noida and another. (in short the opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the complainant purchased Voltas 1.5 ton Split AC bearing model No. Voltas 183 JZJ on Paytm Mall application through the seller Divya Electronics on 27.5.2018 for Rs. 35,475/- paid through credit card. The order was delivered to the complainant on 1.6.2018 in two packages one containing indoor unit and other containing outdoor unit alongwith original invoice dated 28.5.2018. The installation was completed on 6.6.2018. Then while switching on AC the complainant found that it bears different model number as compare to what was ordered and its model is 183 JZJ 1 which is cheaper and consist of aluminum condenser as compare to original ordered AC of cooper condenser. Further, on both the packages 1 was erased to make it look like the model which was ordered. The complainant lodged his complaint on paytmmall on 6.6.2018 and got complaint No. 69737711. Next day complainant called the seller on phone and complained about the fraud but he told that there is no difference in both the models and when told him difference then he told that he cannot do anything. Then on calling the paytmmall they gave the option of returning the AC but since complainant spent Rs. 7,000/- on installation and wiring it was not possible for him to return the AC. The complainant requested them to replace the AC with actual model or compensate him the losses but no no effect. The complainant regularly reminds them of the complaint but of no use. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following relief.-

1) The opposite parties be directed to replace the AC with an amount of Rs. 40,000/- as compensation.   

2) To pay compensation for mental agony and harassment. 

3) To pay litigation expenses. 

4) Any other relief to which the complainant found entitled. 

3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 1 filed written version taking preliminary objections that the paytmmall and Bazaar is an online market place and acts as a platform for different sellers to sell their products and different buyers to purchase amongst variety of goods subject to terms and conditions. The opposite party No. 1 does not sell any of the goods on the said website directly. The actual contract for sale is directly between the said Merchat and complainant. The opposite party No. 1 has no control over the existence, quality, safety or legality of item displayed. The opposite party No. 1 does not at any point of time during any transaction between buyer and merchant or seller take the ownership of any of the goods offered by the merchant or seller. Paytm E Commerce is not warrantor of the products offered on the platform by various merchants and any issue or disputes regarding the warranty, guarantee, quality and service will be addressed by the manufacturer/servicer providers or merchant.. Paytm E Commerce is not liable for any manufacturing defect, faulty product received, warranty claims, after sales service for any products purchases on the platform. The role of the opposite party No. 1 is only of a facilitator of market place platform and the transactions therein including that of payment solutions to merchant and to complainant and it does not have any control over the transactions between the purchaser, seller and the courier agency. The contract of sale is between the opposite party No. 2 and the complainant and opposite party No. 1 cannot held liable for the same. 

4. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant purchased one Voltas AC 1.5 Ton Split bearing model No. 183 JZJ from the opposite party No. 2 through on line platform of opposite party No. 1 for an amount of Rs. 35,475/-. The opposite party No. 1 is not the seller of the product and is only facilitator to provide platform for sale and purchase the products. Lastly,  the opposite party No. 1 prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs. 

5. The opposite party No. 2 also filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the complainant has got no cause of action against the answering opposite party as the answering opposite party has nothing to do with the warranty obligations extended by other opposite party. The complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary party as manufacturer of product has not been impleaded as necessary party. The complaint contains the allegations of fraud which is not triable by this Commission. It is the duty of the complainant to be beware if there is any discrepancy of the product and same be brought to the knowledge of the opposite party before diminishing the saleable value of the product in question. The product in question is used for commercial purpose.

6. On merits, it is submitted that there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No. 2. The alleged fraud committed which is not triable by this Commission.  Lastly, the opposite party No. 2 prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.  

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the documents and record on the file. Written arguments also filed by the opposite party No. 1. 

8. It is admitted fact between the parties that the complainant purchased the Air Conditioner from the opposite party No. 2 through opposite party No. 1 vide bill dated 27.5.2018. The complainant deposed in his affidavit that when he installed the said Air Conditioner, he found that the opposite parties supplied different model i.e. 183 JZJ 1 as compare to what was ordered i.e. 183 JZJ which is cheaper and consist of aluminum condenser instead of cooper condenser. 

9. To prove this fact the complainant filed photograph of Air Conditioner Ex.C-3 on the file, on which it is clearly mentioned that the Air Conditioner supplied to the complainant is of 183 JZJ 1 model instead of 183 JZJ which was actually ordered by the complainant. The bill dated 27.5.2018 Ex.C-2 also proved that the complainant ordered Air Conditioner model 183JZJ. He also deposed in his affidavit Ex.C-1 that on both the packages of Air Conditioner i.e. Indoor Unit and Outdoor Unit 1 was erased by the opposite parties to make the Air Conditioner to look like the model which was ordered due to which the complainant opened both the packages and installed the said Air Conditioner. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, opposite parties have not filed any document to prove that they have supplied the Air Conditioner as ordered by the complainant. In this way, complainant successfully proved on the file that the opposite parties supplied different model of Air Conditioner to him instead of actual ordered by him, which is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.

10. In view of the above discussion, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite parties are directed to replace the Air Conditioner of the complainant with new one of the Model as actually ordered by the complainant i.e. 183 JZJ. The opposite parties are also directed to pay Rs. 3,300/- to the complainant as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs. 2,200/- as costs and litigation expenses. Compliance of this order be made within the period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the opposite parties are directed to refund the costs of the Air Conditioner i.e. Rs. 35,475/- alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint till actual realization alongwith above mentioned compensation and litigation expenses. Both the parties jointly and severally liable to comply with the above mentioned order. Copy of the order will be supplied to the parties by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

        5th Day of July 2022

 

 

            (Ashish Kumar Grover)

            President

              

(Navdeep Kumar Garg)

Member