Tripura

West Tripura

CC/94/2015

Sri Pradip Ch. Pal. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SNAPDEAL, Syberplace Solution Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. B.Debnath.

15 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA  :  AGARTALA

CASE   NO:   CC- 94 of 2015

Sri Pradip Chandra Pal,
S/O- Lt. Amar Chand Pal,
C/O- Sri Ranju Ratan Pal,
South Dhaleswar, Water Supply Road,
P.O. Agartala College,
P.S. East Agartala,
Agartala, West Tripura.        …..….…...Complainant.

VERSUS

Snap Deal,
Syber Place E Solutions Pvt. Ltd.,
105, KTC Illumination(SBI Retail
Assets Processing Centre),
The Westin Hotel Road,
Madhapur,
City Hyderabad,
Telangana- 500081.            ..............Opposite party.

      __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

C O U N S E L

For the Complainant        : Sri Bhabatosh Debnath,
                      Sri Swarup Pandit,
                      Advocates.

For the O.P.                 : None Appeared.
                    

        JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:  15.06.16

J U D G M E N T
        This case was filed by Pradip Chandra Pal against the Snapdeal Cyber Place Solutions Pvt. Ltd. On being influenced by the advertisement in the on line shopping, Petitioner purchased one mobile set Pananosic Eluga L2 8GB. The order was confirmed. Price was Rs.8523/-. Mobile set was delivered by XPRESSBEES courier service. Parcel was opened. But on opening  the box he did not find any mobile set inside. Immediately he complained to the Snapdeal. Snapdeal assured that person will make contact. But nobody made any contact. Courier person also did not accept the responsibility. He failed to get any redress from the Snapdeal. So, he filed this case stating that the amount spent by him should be returned.

2.        Notice sent to Snapdeal company by speed post. But no response given by the company. So, the case proceeded exparte against Snapdeal. Petitioner produced retail invoice, copy of the message sent by Snapdeal, customer acknowledgment, E-mail correspondence, the delivery report by Snapdeal, track report, of the item marked Exhibit 1 Series.
         Petitioner also examined 2 witness i.e., Pradip Chandra Pal, P.W.1 and Ranju Ratan Pal, P.W.2 who received the consignment. 

3.        We have gone through the evidence given by the petitioner.

4.        On the basis of evidence we shall decide the matter. 

        Findings and decisions;
5.        Pradip Chandra Pal, petitioner clearly stated that he booked the mobile phone with the Snapdeal. Snapdeal is doing business at Agartala through courier service. Advertisement is given in the net which is very much available everyday in Agartala. So, it can be said that the Snapdeal is doing business at Agartala within the jurisdiction of this court. Therefore, this Forum has rightly taken up this case to decide about the deficiency of service by Snapdeal. From the evidence of Pradip Chandra Pal and receiver of consignment, Ranju Ratan Pal it is transpired that the consignment was received by Ranju Ratan Pal. But there was no mobile phone inside the parcel. Ranju Ratan Pal, P.W.2 opened the parcel and surprisingly found another box inside the parcel and there was no mobile set inside the packet except the charger and the flip cover. Matter was informed to the courier person. Complainant sent E-mail to Snap Deal to know the status. Complaint was registered in the Snap Deal but ultimately Snapdeal did not send any mobile phone to the petitioner. E-mail given by Snapdeal if any for contacting them.

6.        On the scrutiny of all these evidence it is clear that the product was not delivered. The delivery report is given through E-mail. Item name written Panasonic Eluga L2 8GB. Payment was made earlier and on payment only the order was confirmed by Snapdeal. Snapdeal received the complaint vide no. 9804677 but no step was taken for giving redress. It is found that at the time of packing the mistake was done by the staff of the Snapdeal or Panasonic company where the packing was done. Snapdeal received Rs.8,523/- and the packet was handed over to Xpress Bees AWB for delivery. Without opening the parcel Xpress Bees handed over the parcel to the brother of the petitioner. But on  opening the Panasonic Eluga  L2 8GB was found missing. Snapdeal O.P. did not take any step for replacing the missing mobile phone. The complaint was registered but no step taken. This is deficiency of service.
 
7.        We therefore, direct O.P. Snapdeal to send the Panasonic Aluga L2 8GB mobile phone to the petitioner within 15 days. For the harassment, mental agony petitioner is entitled to get Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand). O.P. Snapdeal is directed to pay this amount to the petitioner. In case Snapdeal fails to deliver the mobile phone as ordered it should pay amount of Rs.9,000/-(Rupees Nine Thousand) to the petitioner in total Rs.19,000/-(Rupees Nineteen thousand) along with a cost of litigation Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One Thousand), total Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand). We direct O.P. Snapdeal to pay this amount within 2(two) months if the amount is not paid it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.             
      Announced.

 

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA    SRI U. DAS,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA