Delhi

North

CC/92/2019

RAJIV KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

VIJAY SHEKHER SHARMA & ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

03 Aug 2024

ORDER

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I (North District)

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi]

Ground Floor, Court Annexe -2 Building, Tis Hazari Court Complex, Delhi- 110054

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 92/2019

In the matter of

Rajiv Kumar Pathak

Ganga Apartment,

Khasra No.123/8, Pragiti Enclave,

Sant Nagar, Burari,

Delhi-110084                                       ...                          Complainant

Versus

Vijay Shekher Sharma, CEO

Paytm.com

B-121, Sector-5,

Noida-201301 (UP)                     …                          Opposite Party No. 1

 

Chief Customer Care Officer,

Paytm.com

B-121, Sector-5,

Noida-201301 (UP)                    …                          Opposite Party No. 2

 

Divya Electronics

Having office at

Pocket 5, Pratap Nagar

Mayur Vihar

New Delhi-110091                      …                          Opposite Party No. 3

 

ORDER

03.08.2024

(Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar)

1. By way of this complaint, the Complainant herein has alleged deficiency of service on part of the OPs herein namely Shri Vijay Shekhar Sharma, CEO, M/s PayTM.com (OP-1 herein), Chief Customer Care Officer, PayTM.com (OP-2 herein) and M/s Divya Electronics (OP-3 herein). All the Ops are ex-parte as none of the parties appeared and participated in the proceedings despite effective service to them. Hence, we have considered the pleadings, documents placed on record and arguments advanced on behalf of the Complainant only, before reserving the order.
2. The Complainant has ordered one 1.5 ton split copper Air Conditioner allegedly from the website paytm[dot]com through order number 7951108871 from the website of the M/s paytm.com on 13/04/2019. The payment was also made on the said date. The said Air Conditioner was allegedly sold by M/s Divya Electronics on the portal of Paytm.com.
3. It is the case of the Complainant that the said Air Conditioner was promised to be delivered on 17/04/2019, but the same was not delivered on the promised date. Further as the Complainant had to leave for Chandigarh on 18/04/2019, he allegedly given instructions to the Customer Care of paytm[dot]com and also to the deliveryman telephonically for not delivering the said product and to cancel the order. However, as the Complainant did not inform his family members about the cancellation of the order, the delivery attempted by the OPs on 18/04/2019 was accepted by the family members of the Complainant.
4. Thereafter, on 19/04/2019, the complainant has registered a formal cancellation request and requested for the return of the said product. It is alleged that the return request was subsequently rejected on 24/04/2019 and the said product is still lying with the Complainant in packed condition as the Complainant has not install the said product. The Complainant also alleges that the OPs have not replied to their legal notice and have not taken any steps to pick-up the said product on the return request and also not refunded the amount so charged.
5. We have perused the pleadings, documents on record and heard the argument on behalf of the Complainant. We are of the opinion that the allegations made by the Complainant herein, are not substantiated by any of the documents.
6. The Complainant has not placed on record the booking details or screen shots of the website of paytm[dot]com from where the order was placed. The screen shots attached by the complainant herein do not clearly indicate or identify that the said screenshot pertains to the website/ mobile application of paytm[dot]com. Further it is also not established that the said product was purchased and booked from the website of paytm[dot]com by the Complainant herein. Neither details of the website nor details of the Complainant are shown in the screen shots so filed by the complainant. Further, the complainant has not placed on record the bills which would establish the pleading regarding the details of the paytm[dot]com website and OP-3 seller.
7. The complainant has also not placed on record any documents to indicate that he has made the request for cancellation of the order on 18/04/2019 itself. The details of the customer care phone number of the call details for the calls made to the customer care and the delivery executives have been placed on record. However, when the product was already delivered and the delivery was accepted by the family members of the Complainant, the Complainant cannot argue that the delivery was made without his consent.
8. The reasons for the request for return and rejection of the said return request can also not be ascertained by the documents so filed by the complainant. The screen shot filed by the complainant indicates that there are certain more details which are available for return request of the said order. But these details have also not been filed by the complainant.
9. Hence, in absence of any documents in support of the allegations of the complainant, we are of the opinion that the Complainant is not able to establish his case against the OPs. As a result, we are of the opinion that this case is without any merits.
10. As a result, this complaint is dismissed being devoid of merits. No cost. Office is directed to supply the copy of this order to the parties as per rules. Order be also uploaded on the website.  Thereafter, file be consigned to the record room.

 

 

___________________________

Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar, President

 

 

___________________________

Ashwani Kumar Mehta, Member