Davender filed a consumer case on 09 Jun 2016 against The CEO-cum-Director M/s One Mobikwik Systems Pvt. Ltd., in the DF-II Consumer Court. The case no is CC/244/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 05 Jul 2016.
Chandigarh
DF-II
CC/244/2016
Davender - Complainant(s)
Versus
The CEO-cum-Director M/s One Mobikwik Systems Pvt. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)
The CEO-cum-Director, M/s One Mobikwik Systems Pvt. Ltd., 2nd Floor, Orchid Centre, Gold Course Road, Sector 53, Gurgaon, Haryana -122001.
The Care Manager, M/s Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., SP Infocity, Plot No.243, Udyog Vihar, Phase-1, Dundahera, Gurgaon, Haryana-122016.
…. Opposite Parties.
BEFORE: SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT
SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER
Argued by: Complainant in person.
OP exparte.
PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT
In brief, the case of the complainant is that OP No.2-M/s Nokia India Sales Pvt. Ltd., (who is marketing Microsoft Lumia Phones in India) and OP No.1-M/s One Mobikwik Systems Pvt. Ltd. ( a mobile recharge company) in the month of August, 2015 jointly came up with an offer of extra cashback of Rs.300/- each month by adding money of Rs.300/- on Mobikwik App with using promo code LUM300 (later changed to LUMTBX2M8G in the month of January, 2016) by using Microsoft Lumia mobiles phones. The offer was valid on six models i.e. Lumia 430,535,540,640,640XL & 730 and the OPs committed to redeem the offer for 12 months. To avail this offer, the complainant purchased Microsoft Lumia 430 Mobile Phone for Rs.4,319/- through online from ebay on 07.08.2015. The complainant successfully registered on Mobikwik app. in the month of August, 2015 and received the cashback of Rs.300/- per month till February, 2016 i.e. for seven months. A statement showing the cashback is Annexure C-4. In the month of March, 2016, the promo code showing no longer valid and he contacted OP No.1 to look into the matter who told him that the LUM300 offer was closed and it was not liable to credit any further cashback on this count as Mobikwik reserves the right to change or call back the offer any time on its sole discretion. It has been alleged that in the terms and conditions, it was clearly mentioned that the offer was valid for 12 months and he purchased the said mobile only to avail the said offer and he suffered financial loss due to discontinue of the offer. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. Delight
Despite due service through registered post, the Opposite Party failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 30.05.2016.
We have heard the complainant, in person, and have gone through the documents on record.
After going through the documents on record, we are of the considered view that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. As per the Annexure A-1, the user registering on or before 15th November, 2015 was entitled to cashback upto Rs.3,600/- minimum @ Rs.300/- per month on mobikwik app. subject to its terms and conditions. Admittedly, the complainant successfully registered on mobikwik app in the month of August, 2015 and he availed the cashback of Rs.2100/- upto February 2016 i.e. for seven months @ Rs.300/- per month as per Annexure C-4.
As regards the plea of the complainant that OP No.1 stopped paying the amount @ Rs.300/- per month after February, 2016 (i.e. after seven months ) is concerned, we have minutely gone through Annexure C-1 placed on record by the complainant and the close scrutiny of the same reveals that the users, who are using Microsoft Lumina 430,535, 540, 640, 640XL and 730 and registering on or before 15th November, 2015 were entitled to cashback upto Rs.3,600/- on mobikwik app. subject to its terms and conditions for 12 months. Meaning thereby, the cashback upto Rs.3,600/- payable by the OPs to the users on mobikwik app could be less than or equal to but not more than Rs.3,600/-. Under these circumstances, if the OPs have closed the offer/stopped after paying Rs.2,100/- (Rs.300/- per month) to the complainant under the Lumia Offer then it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that they have committed any deficiency in service by not paying the remaining amount because they were liable to pay the cashback upto Rs.3,600/- and not the full amount of Rs.3,600/- as tried to be projected. The complainant has, thus, failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
6. For the reasons recorded above, finding the complaint to be devoid of any substance and merit, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.
Announced
09/06/2016
Sd/-
(RAJAN DEWAN)
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(PRITI MALHOTRA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.