Complaints filed on: 17-10-2022

                                                      Disposed on: 21-03-2023

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, TUMAKURU.

          DATED THIS THE DAY OF 21^st Day of MARCH 2023

PRESENT

SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, B.Com., LLM., PRESIDENT

SRI.KUMARA.N, B.Sc. (Agri), LLB., MBA., MEMBER

SMT.NIVEDITA RAVISH, B.A., LLB. (Spl)., LADY MEMBER

CC.No.150/2022

Vasanth Kumar

S/o Muddugeriaha,

Sri.Lakshmi Ranganatha Nilaya,

SBM Layout, Batawadi,

Tumkur – 572 103.

……….Complainant

( In Person)

V/s

CEO/Marketing In-charge,

Samsung India Electronics Private Limited,

6^th Floor, DLF Centre, Sunsad Margh,

New Delhi – 110 001.

……….Opposite Party

(By Puran Law Associates, Adv.,)

:ORDER:

BY SMT.G.T.VIJAYALAKSHMI, PRESIDENT

This complaint is filed by the complainant with a prayer to direct the OP to deliver the product booked by him and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental agony.

2.       The brief facts of the complaint are as under:-

The complainant booked Mobile S22+ Phantom white through Samsung e-store (Online Portal) by paying Rs.38,349/- vide order number 33004228843 on 24.9.2022.  The OP promise to deliver the product on 30.09.2022.  Since it was not packed or there was no shipping details of the app., the complainant raised a complaint with customer support on 27.09.2022 stating about the same and also raised the  issue in all available platform where Samsung India exist and after making 20-25 calls to their customer care, the stated in e-mail that “we have requested for the cancellation of the order, but the complainant did not request for any cancellation.  When questioned about the same, the OP stated that due to technical glitch, they were cancelled the order.  It shows that they OP is following bad trade practices and when questioned the same, the OP did not respond and stated that to wait for 28 to 48 hours, but now the OP saying that they will refund the amount.  The complainant has ordered the phone thinking as memory of Diwali, but the OP did not send the Phone and thereby committed deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice.  Hence, the complainant filed complaint.  

3.       After service of notice, the OP appeared and filed the version stating that the complaint is filed with mischievous intention and thereby to enable the complainant to enrich at the cost of OP.  The complainant is not approached this Commission with clean hands.  The complaint is not maintainable due to non-joinder of proper and necessary party.  It is further contended by the OP that the allegation of the complainant made in the complaint and more particularly he has purchased Samsung S22+ for Rs.38,349/- from  e-store is not true and correct and same is denied as false.  In-fact, the complainant produced order details of Samsung S22+ before this Commission, but production of order acknowledgment slip does not ipso facto empower the complainant to file this complaint as a consumer by contending he is purchaser of Samsung S22+.  The purchase order is made by the complainant but payment is made by 3^rd party under specific channel.  It is further contended by the OP that while acknowledging the order, they stated that “we will reach out to you if there is any issue in processing our order”, this clearly establish that the complainant was informed immediately after placing the order and they also intimated that the order was cancelled due to unavoidable circumstances.  Hence, question of making alleged multiple communications does not arise.  The OP further contended that they have refunded the amount against the order ID 33004228843 and thereby they acted as per their undertaking. The OP further submits that they never agreed or promised to sell Samsung S22+ mobile cash on delivery basis.  When full refund is initiated much before filing this complaint, question of payment of any amount much less the alleged amount as claimed in this complaint towards the alleged mental harassment does not arise. In-fact while refunding the amount, Mr.Bharath never raised any objection.  On these among other grounds, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint.   

4.       The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence, but not marked the documents though produced.  Mr.Sandeep Sahijwani, Director, Customer Satisfaction (QA-Lab) of OP files affidavit evidence on behalf of OP. The OP also not marked 01 document produced by him.

5.       On perusal of copy of pleadings and documents, the points that would arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of OP?

2. Whether complainant is entitled for reliefs sought for?

6.       Our findings to the aforesaid points are as under:

Point No.1: Partly in the Affirmative

Point No.2: As per the final order

:REASONS:

7.       The admitted facts between the parties are;

1. The complainant booked Mobile S22 + Phanton white for memory of Diwali through Samsung e-store (online portal) by paying Rs.38,349/- vide order No.3304228843 on 24.09.2022 
2. The OP promised to deliver the product on 30.09.2022. 
3. The complainant raised a complaint with customer support on 27.09.2022.
4. The OP stated that “due to technical glitch, they were cancelled the order and refunded the amount to the complainant against the order ID 33004228843.

8.       From the above admitted facts and e-mail communications between the complainant and OP, it is clear that the complainant for the memory of Diwali placed the order for Samsung mobile i.e. S22 + Phantom through Samsung online portal.  The complainant paid Rs.38,349/- on 24.09.2022 and the OP agreed to deliver the said mobile on 30.09.2022.  Later, the OP voluntarily cancelled the order and refunded the amount to complainant’s account.  In the email dated:07.10.2022, the OP clearly mentioned that “we sincerely apologize for cancelling the order due to unforeseen challenges”.  In email dated:14.10.2022, it is mentioned that “please be informed that we have refunded the amount of Rs.38,349/- on 13.10.2022, Bank Ref.No.228623511204 against your order ID 3300428843.  From the above email conversations dated:07.10.2022 and 14.10.2022, it clearly discloses that without request of the complainant, the OP has cancelled the order and refunded the amount to the complainant’s account. 

9.       The OP received Rs.38,349/- on 24.09.2022 and agreed date of delivery of the said mobile was 30.09.2022.  But the OP refunded the money on 13.10.2022.   When the OP received the order and money for the mobile, it is the bounden duty of the OP to deliver the Mobile on or before the agreed date.  If failed to deliver the mobile on the agreed date, it amounts to deficiency of service.   The OP refunded the amount without the consent and request of the complainant amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of OP.  If OP has not taken the order and money from the complainant, the complainant has choice to order on different online Flat forms.  So, the OP curtails the complainant’s choices to get the mobile on the occasion of Deepawali with attractive prices/offers.  Hence, the OP is liable to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/- as punitive damages for committing unfair trade practice by the OPs as because the OP did not deliver the mobile after receiving the full amount by the complainant and retaining the money for more than 20 days and litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/-.  Accordingly, we pass the following:-   

:ORDER:

The complaint is allowed in part.

The OP is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation, Rs.5,000/- as punitive damages  and Rs.6,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.

The OP is further directed to comply the above order within 45 days from the date of receipt/knowledge of the order, failing which the above amount carry interest @ 9% PA from the date of complaint to till realization.

Supply free copy of this order to both parties