D.O.F : 26/07/2023
D.O.O : 10/06/2024
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD
CC.224/2023
Dated this, the10th day of June 2024
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
Peethambaran T, aged 26 years
S/o Kallingal Kannan,
Jabala Nehru
Kuttikole P O
Kasaragod district. : Complainant
And
The Authorized signatory
William Stone,
Ajay, B 104,
Gate No.3,
Freedom fighter Neb Sarai
110068,
New Delhi, India. : Opposite Party
ORDER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
The facts of the case is that, the opposite party is an online seller of various products and is doing business all over India. In the month of May 2023, the complainant was canvased by an advertisement in facebook regarding a product card holder wallet. In the advertisement, it is stated that the product is available on cash on delivery at a discount rate of Rs. 799/- giving 60% discount. A video also shown in which it showed that the wallet is made with strong metal body which is water resistant. It is shown that a car is driven over the wallet and the wallet did not sustained any damage as per the video. It is further shown that it will prevent data theft and it is made of strong aluminum body. The name of the product was credit card wallet. The complainant was very much interested by the advertisement and the videos, ordered for one piece of wallet of card holder. On 30/05/2023, the complainant received the consignment and paid the amount of Rs. 799/-. When the complainant opened the cover, he was really shocked as it is just like a soap box without any strength and it was again not at all water resistant and it was not having a strong body and by using fingers we can bend it. In the packet, it is seen that it is made in China. The complainant is realized the actual value of the soap box like metal box without any quality and strength will be below 30 rupees. Moreover it is not at all suitable to keep any card such as bank cards, driving license, visiting cards etc. The actual value of a small soap box like product will be between 20-30 rupees. The complainant was cheated by the deceitful advertisement and video of opposite party. But the product was attractive in the video exhibited in the advertisement of opposite party. But the delivered product is entirely different from the product shown in the video. Due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party, the complainant had suffered huge monitory loss and mental tension. The complainant is seeking a direction against opposite party to take back the product supplied by them and to refund Rs. 799/- along with a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-.
The opposite party filed version stating that the complaint is not maintainable as the complainant has failed to point out any cause of action against opposite party and that this opposite party has no role to play with regard to the quality of the product. The opposite party further denied that he is an online seller of various products and is doing business all over India. He is only a third person in the entire transaction. The complainant placed order before the opposite party and the opposite party forwarded the said order to the manufacturer of the product. The manufacturer delivered the said product and collected the price. Whatever has been shown in the alleged video of the said product, it is the sole responsibility of the manufacturer to answer the queries of the customer. The complainant failed to inform the opposite party with regard to the allegation of quality of the product. The complaint is silent with regard to the efforts made by the complainant to contact the opposite party and register his grievances. This complaint is filed with an ulterior motive to grab money from opposite party, so he has demanded an imaginary amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation. The opposite party further denied that the complainant has suffered monitory loss and mental agony as alleged. No documentary evidence is submitted to prove the same. It is again denied that the complainant is a victim of cheating as alleged in the complaint and the opposite party is liable to pay a compensation to the complainant as alleged in the complaint. The complainant is not entitled for any relief as claimed in light of the fact that the complainant never made any written or oral communication with regard to the quality of the product whatsoever till date. The opposite party has reserved his right to lodge a criminal complaint against the complainant causing huge loss to the reputation of opposite party and for defamation and to claim Rs. 1,00,00,000/- as compensation in the light of above averments.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the documents produced are marked as Ext. A1 series, MO1 & MO2. Heard the complainant. The issues raised for consideration are;
- Whether there is any deficiency in service / unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party in selling entirely different product than the product shown in advertisements?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for relief?
- If so, what is the relief?
All issues can be discussed together. The complainant influenced by an advertisement of opposite party, placed order for card holder wallet. He availed the product through cash on delivery. But the product shown in the video is entirely different from the product delivered. The complainant was shocked by seeing the product as it is just like a soap box without any strength and it was not at all water resistant. It is not having a strong body and by using fingers, we can bend it. In the packet it is seen that it is made in China. The complainant assess the actual value of such a product may be below 30 rupees, as it is without any quality or strength. It is not at all suitable to keep any cards such as bank cards, driving license, visiting cards etc. The opposite party’s deceitful marketing method caused huge loss and mental agony to the complainant. This commission carefully gone through the affidavit and evidences produced by the complainant. MO1 is the product which is smaller than a soap box and is without any quality comparing its price. It is not at all water resistant. The product is not having a strong body and by using fingers, we can bend it. The advertisement and video given by opposite party is of fraudulent one. On perusal of MO1, A2 series and MO2 pen drive, this commission found that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. This misleading advertisement of opposite party caused monitory loss and mental agony to the complainant. The opposite party is bound to compensate the loss and agony undergone by the complainant. The complainant is entitled for relief in this case. The contention raised by opposite party is that the complainant failed to point out any cause of action against opposite party. It is very clear from the facts of the case that the cause of action arose on the date of placement of order of the product and on delivery of the product in Kuttikole village within the jurisdiction of this commission. Even though opposite party send their version by post, they have not made any attempt to disprove the case of the complainant.
The prayer of the complainant is to refund the price of the product, ie, Rs. 799/- with a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with cost of litigation.
As the product delivered is entirely different than the product ordered, the complainant is entitled for refund of the price of the product with compensation and cost. Considering the facts and situation of this case, an amount of Rs. 10,000/- is a reasonable compensation in this case. The complainant is also entitled for cost of litigation of Rs. 5,000/-.
In the result, complaint is allowed directing opposite party to refund Rs. 799/- (Rupees Seven hundred and Ninety Nine only) with a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) along with Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1 series
MO1 – Product
MO2 – Pen drive
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
JJ/
