West Bengal

Bankura

CC/48/2023

Sri Samar Moi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Competent Authority, FLIPKART INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED - Opp.Party(s)

Sandip Chakrabarty

23 Nov 2023

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANKURA

  Consumer Complaint No. 48/2023

          Date of Filing:25/05/2023

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                              Ld. President.      

2. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.                            

 

For the Complainant:  Ld. Advocate Sandip Chakrabarti

For the O.P.: Ld. Advocate  Sayantan Chowdhury                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Complainant 

Sri Samar Moi, S/O- Bimal Moi, R/O- Khatra Rajapara More, P.O. & P.S.- Khatra, District- Bankura,  PIN-722 140, Mob No.- 9434652561                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

Opposite Party                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    The Competent Authority, FLIPKART INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, Vaishnavi Summit, Ground Floor, 7^th Main, 80 Feet Road, 3^rd Block, Koramangala Industrial Layout, Bangalore, Karnataka- 560034, India.

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT  

 

Order No.07

Dated:23-11-2023

Both parties file hazira through advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

After perusing Brief notes of argument and affidavit in chief the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -

The Complainant’s case is that he booked an order with O.P. for purchase of Balwaan Crop Cutter four stroke Brush Cutter with Model Balwaan BX-35B for Rs.15,900/- and after confirmation of the order the Complainant received a package with Invoice code FAC6Y52300016794 on 24/12/2022 and opening the said package the Complainant found that a different item has been delivered with the description of the item as ‘ROVER’ Brush Cutter with SL630. Immediately thereafter the Complainant posted replacement request to the O.P. but surprisingly the O.P. rejected the same on 03/01/2023 showing the cause that the return request ended on 31/12/2022. The Complainant has therefore approached this Commission either for delivery of the product under order or return of its price.

O.P. contested the case by filing a written version and affidavit in chief contending inter alia that they have no liability in delivery of the product and as such the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.

                                                                                                                                                                           Contd……p/2

                                                                                                 Page: 2

.                                                                            -: Decision with reasons: -

Having regard to the facts of the case, submission, contention and documents on both sides the Commission finds that admittedly the Complainant received a wrong product in lieu of the product which he booked and the O.P. who entertained the order has not co-operated with the Complainant either to get refund of the payment already made to the O.P. or to get back the product in question citing the ground that they have no liability in such transaction.

But the relevant law does not say so. Section 2(27) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 defines Product seller in relation to a product inter alia who is otherwise involved in placing such product for commercial purpose. Admittedly O.P./Company is an E-commerce entity within the definition of Section 3(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act (E-commerce Rules), 2020 and in view of Section 6(4)(a) of the said Rule the Seller offering goods or services through an E-commerce entity shall have a prior written contract with the respective              E-commerce entity in order to undertake or solicit such sale or offer. It is therefore evident from the rules stated above that the O.P./Company has privity of contract with the product seller or the delivery agency and as such the O.P. cannot avoid their liability of delivery of wrong product. The Complainant is therefore entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Hence it is ordered……..

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest but without cost.

The O.P./Flipkart Company is directed to deliver the product in question to the Complainant or to refund the price of the same after taking return of the delivered product along with litigation cost of Rs.2, 000/- within 45 days from this date in default the law will take its own course.

Both parties be supplied copy of this order free of cost.

 

 ____________________                _________________         

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT          HON’BLE MEMBER