JUDGEMENT & ORDER

(28.04.2023)

1. On 27.09.2019, the complainant purchased three motor parts via, left Link Rod, Right Link Rod, balance rod for his JEEP COMPASS vehicle from opposite party no. 3 for Rs. 25, 738 (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty-Eight) only. A copy of Tax invoice of Mahesh Motors Private Limited is enclosed herein as annexure-I
2. The purchased products were sent by the Opposite party no. 3 through Opposite party No.1 Safexpress Pvt. Limited, Guwahati to deliver at the registered address of the complainant, which is Itanagar but the complainant was shocked to see that inside the delivered parcel (packet), there was only windshield of the car, which he never ordered from them.
3. On enquiry, it was found that employee of opposite party no. 1 put wrong address in the consignment which was supposed to be sent to Delhi for some other customers but mistakenly delivered to the complainant’s address. Opposite party No.1 accepted their mistake and requested to return actual consignment to which complainant agreed and waited for some days.
4. After almost one month of the assurance from OP No. 1, complainant received the parcel (packet) but found only balance rod (item) inside the parcel and ordered two more items, i.e., left link rod and right link rod were found in the parcel.
5. Hence, the complainant claimed that such act of the opposite parties caused negligence and deficiency in service thereby causing harassment to the complainant.
6. Complainant’s prayers: The complainant has prayed for: -
   1. To refund the cost of the motor parts (products) amounting to Rs 25, 738.00 paid by him to the opposite parties;
   2. Pay Rs 1, 00,000 for causing harassment and deficiency in service; and
   3. Pay Rs 20, 000/- as cost of Litigation
7. Upon the notice, the Opposite parties no. 1 & 2 appeared and contested the present consumer complaint by filing written statement in defence. 
8. Both the learned counsels have filed their written argument; we have heard their oral submissions as well and have perused the records of the case carefully.
9.  The points for determination in the case are:-
   1. Whether the complainant is the consumer as defined under Consumer protection Act?
   2. Whether the opposite parties no. 1 & 2 have been deficient in service and negligent in providing service to him?
   3.  Whether the complainant is entitled to the compensation? If yes, what relief?
10.  The point No. i:- The section 2 (d) of the consumer Protection Act, 1986 does not include a person a who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose or avails services for commercial purpose.
11. On going through the facts and records of the case, it is clearly found that complainant on 27.09.2018 purchased three motor parts for his JEEP COMPASS Vehicle from opposite party no. 3 amounting to Rs 25, 738.00; a copy of tax invoice document (annexure-I of complaint’s petition) was sent by opposite party no. 3 by taking the delivery service of opposite parties no. 1 and delivered it to the complainant’s address by paying sum of Rs 1190/- (annexure-2). Thus, we hold that complainant is a consumer under section 2 (1)(d) of the consumer protection Act 1986 and also hold that he availed the services from the opposite party No.1 & 2.
12. The point No. ii & iii: It is the case of the complainant that he purchased three items of motor part from opposite party No. 3 by availing services (delivery) from opposite party no.1 & 2 but delivered the wrong items consisting only one item (product), which complainant did no order (purchase) from opposite no. 3. Contrary to his claim, we do not find any supporting documents placed by the complainant that he had received a wrong product being sent by the opposite part No. 3, except a copy of track record (annexure-3) enclosed with the present complaint petition.
13. Therefore, we are of considered view that complainant failed to show that there was negligent and deficiency in service rendered by the opposite parties in delivering products or items he purchased from them. In result, complaint is dismissed.
14. Pronounced judgment on 28.04.2023 at Yupia.
15. A copy this judgment and order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.

Shri Tarh Loma, Member                           Miss Deepa Yoka, Member

Shri Gote Mega, President