DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C.C.46 /2022
Date of Filing Date of Admission Date of Disposal
25.02.2022 28.02.2022 07.02.2024
Kanan Paul, W/o. Paran Chandra Paul , 2, B.N. Sarani , 1st Lane Mathpara, P.O. Nona Chandanpukur, Barrackpore, P.S. Titagarh, Kolkata700122.
VS-
To
The Managing Director, Flipkart Internet Private Limited,
Flipkar t Internet Private Limited, Buildings Begonia & Clove Embassy Tech Village, Outer Ring Road,
Devarabeesanahalli Village,P.O. Bellandur, P.S Maratha Hall,
Bengaluru-560103, Karnataka , India.
P R E S E N T :- Sri. Daman Prosad Biswas……….President.
:- Sri. Abhijit Basu…………………. Member.
Complainant above named filed this complaint under Section 34(1), 34(2)(d),35)36)and(39)of the C.P.Act praying for direction to the opposite party to render proper service to the complainant and to share link regarding rest payment and unlock the phone at the earliest.
He alleged that he purchased one mobile from O.P. No.1 through the hand set of his friend. As per the scheme he paid 70% amount of the value of the said mobile amounting to Rs. 10041/-. As per said scheme he was agreed to pay remaining 30% amount i.e. Rs. 4,950/- within next one year. He got the said mobile and started to use the same. But in the meantime his friend has expired on Covid -19, as a result he could not pay the remaining amount of aforesaid 30% in favour of the O.P. Due to non- payment of said amount O.P locked the mobile and complainant is unable to use the same. He made several contacts but did not get any fruitful result. He filed this case.
O.P appeared in this regard and filed W.V. and denied the entire allegation made in the petition of complaint contending interlia that the case is not maintainable and complainant suppressed the actual fact and he is not entitled to any relief as per her prayer..
Trial
During trial complainant filed affidavit in chief. O.P not yet filed questionnaire.
Document
On perusal of record we find that the complainant filed the following documents.
Tax invoice dated 22.10.2020 ……..one sheet Xerox.
- Copy of SMS…….one sheet Xerox.
- Copy of SMS one sheet Xerox.
- Copy of SMS …..one sheet Xerox.
Contd/-2
C.C. 46/2022
- Copy of SMS- one sheet Xerox.
- Copy of SMS ……one sheet Xerox.
6)Copy of scheme regarding purchase of mobile-2 sheets-xerox.
7) Copy of massage -2 sheets –xerox.
8. Copy of reply by O.P. dated 05.03.22-one sheet – Xerox.
9)Copy of voter card of complainant –one sheet-xerox.
10)Copies of Aadhar card- one sheet- Xerox.
11)Copy of Pan Card- one sheet Xerox.
12)Letter of Authorization –one sheet Original.
13) Copies of passport of Paritosh Paul-one sheet Xerox.
BNA
Complainant filed BNA.
Decision with Reasons
We have carefully gone through the aforesaid documents. We have heard for the complainant’s husband at length. On perusal of Advocate’s letter dated 16.12.2021 we find that complainant served the legal notice to the O.Ps stating her grievance and O.P got the said Advocate”s letter on 07.03.2022. But as per the allegation of the complainant he did not get any justice for the O.P and for that reason he filed this case before this commission. It is the further allegation of the complainant that as he took steps and also tried to pay Rs.4,950/- in favour of the O.P but failed and did not get any help from for the O. P, so that aforesaid amount was not paid in favour of the O.P.
As the complainant is willing to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 4,950/- so we do not find any fault on the part of the complainant. On the other hand we failed to understand as to why the litigation is going on where complainant is ready to pay the remaining amount of Rs.4,950/- in favour of the O.P.
In this situation act of the act of the O.P is noting but deficiency in service under the C.P. Act, 2019.
On perusal of the record we find that complainant is the consumer and the O.P is the service provider.
Having regard to the aforesaid discussion it is clear before us that complainant has able to establish his grievance by sufficient documents beyond reasonable doubts and he is entitled to relief as per her prayer.
In the result, the present case succeeds.
Hence,
it is ordered,
that the case be and the same vide No.CC/46/2022 is allowed on contest against the O.P with cost of Rs. 3,000/- to be paid by O.P in favour of the complainant.
Contd/-3
C.C. 46/2022
O.P is directed to receive Rs. 4,950/- from the complainant and supply the necessary link in favour of the complainant so that complainant can use the said mobile. Preferable within 45 days from this day failing which complainant shall have liberty to put this order into execution.
O.P is also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation in favour of the complainant for his harassment , mental pain and agony within 45 days from this day failing which complainant shall have liberty to put this order into execution.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per C.P. R of 2005.
Dictated and corrected by me.
President
Member President
