Haryana

Karnal

CC/692/2022

Sourabh Tyagi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rapipay Fintech Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

03 Nov 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        CC No.692 of 2022

                                                        Date of instt. 05.12.2022

                                                        Date of Decision 03.11.2023

 

Sourabh Tyagi aged 22 years son of Shri Subhash Chand, resident of H.No.378, Opposite Cooperative Sugar Mill, Suraj Nagar, Karnal, 132001, Aadhar No.3309-3537-2674.

 

                                                                …….Complainant

                                Versus

 

Rapipay Fintech Private Limited, A-8, 8^th Floor, Sector 68, Q-Tower, Noida (UP) 201309, through its authorised person (mobile Nos.Lokesh Virmani (9711558552), Vikas Sharma (9254109265).

 

                                                                ……Opposite party

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.  

 

Before       Sh. Jaswant Singh…….…President    

Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

                 Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

 

Present:    Complainant in person.

                Shri Amish Goel, counsel for OP.

 

(Vineet Kaushik, Member)

       

ORDER:  

 

                 The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that OP has been maintaining a bank account No.3780412640 with Central Bank of India. The OP provides a digital banking service to the public at large in the country with Neo Banking Super App NYE. On 28.09.2022, complainant had transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the OP through cash free payment, vide IMPS transaction No.227118970978 but the said amount has not been showing as Credited in his Rapipay Wallet. After waiting sufficiently, when the said amount has not been credited in the Rapipay wallet of the complainant, then the complainant contacted Cash Free application via e-mail, they reverted that the said amount has already been done. Despite repeated request,  the payment has not been credited in the wallet. Hence, the present complaint.

2.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary with regard to maintainability, mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties, etc. On merits, it is submitted that complainant has no privity of contract with the OP. The complainant has utilized the gateway rendered by one Cashfree Payments India Private Limited. The complainant has also filed documents in support of his alleged case which signify that the complainant has addressed correspondence to Cashfree Payments India Private Limited only. The OP is engaged in the business of providing digital financial solutions such as facilitation of digital financial services provided by various service providers including but not limited to financial inclusion services in partnership with banks as business correspondent, distribution of payments and financial products and services including loans, insurance products, issuance and sales of wallets and prepaid cards and non-financial nature products and services through its platform. The complainant has utilized the gateway of cashfree payments India Private Limited and not the platform of the OP. In the event, the complainant has any grievance, such grievance can only be addressed by Cashfree Payments India Private Limited, whose gateway has been utilized by the complainant. Further, the OP has not received any correspondence, be it email or otherwise, from Cashfree Payments India Private Limited, requesting the OP to provide charge back for the alleged transaction carried out by the complainant. 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 or the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, Extract of email Ex.C1 and closed the evidence on 31.01.2023 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Jithin Jayasheel Karkera, as Ex.OP1/A, copy of authority letter Ex.OPW1/1, certificate of authorisation Ex.OPW1/2, copy of Rapipay conditions Ex.OPW1/3, copy of account statement Ex.OPW1/4 and closed the evidence on 23.08.2023 by suffering separate statement.

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

7.             Complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently submitted that the he has transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- through the application of OP, vide IMPS transaction No.227118970978 but the said amount has not been shown Credited in his Rapipay Wallet. In this regard, e-mail was sent whereby Cashfree Support has replied that the amount vide transaction No. 227118970978 is a payout transfer. Meaning thereby, that the said amount has been credited in the account of the OP but despite that the said amount has not been credited by the OP in his account 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 the complainant has utilized the gateway rendered by one Cashfree Payments India Private Limited but the complainant has not impleaded Cashfree Payments India Private Limited as party to the present complaint. He further  argued that the OP has not received any correspondence, be it email or otherwise, from Cashfree Payments India Private Limited, requesting the OP to provide charge back for the alleged transaction carried out by the complainant. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of the complainant.

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

10.            It is an admitted fact that the complainant has been using the Application of the OP and whereby he has been transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from his account.

11.            The OP has alleged that the complainant has not impleaded Cashfree Payments India Private Limited as party in the present complaint, thus, the complaint is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. It is admitted that the while transferring the money in question, the complainant has used the gateway of Cashfree Payments India Private Limited but from the copy of account statement Ex.OPW1/4, it has been proved that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- vide transaction No.227118970978 has already been credited in the account of the OP. Since, the amount in dispute has already been credited in the account of the OP, thus, Cashfree Payments India Private Limited, is no longer necessary party in the present complaint. Hence, this plea taken by the OP is having no force at all.

12.            It is not the case of the OP that they had not received the disputed amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. Furthermore, from the account statement Ex.OPW1/4, it is crystal clear that the said amount has been credited in the account of the complainant on 28.09.2022 but despite that the OP has not credited the said amount in the account/wallet of the complainant. Since, the said amount has already been credited in the account of the OP and this fact was very much in the knowledge of the OP but despite the fact, the OP did not return the said amount to the complainant and has harassed the complainant. Thus, there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP.    

13.            In view of the above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to refund Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from 28.09.2022 (date of payment received in the account of OP) till its realization. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied 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.

Announced

Dated: 03.11.2023                                                                     

                                                                  President,

                                                       District Consumer Disputes

                                                       Redressal Commission, Karnal.

(Vineet Kaushik)       (Dr. Suman Singh)

                     Member                    Member