Punjab

Sangrur

CC/666/2017

Krishan Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Xiaomi Mi Mobile India - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sonu Marken

13 Jun 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                             

                                                                   Complaint no. 666                                                                                         

                                                                    Instituted on:  18.12.2017                                                                                    

                                                                   Decided on:    13.06.2018

 

Krishan Kumar son of Satpal Singh resident of Bazigar Basti, Ward No.17, Sunam, District Sangrur.      

                                                …. Complainant.   

 

Versus

 

1.       Xiaomi MI Mobile India 5th Floor, Delta BLK, Embassy Tech sq, Marthalli Sarjapur Outer ring Road, Kaverappa Layout Kadubeesanaballi  Bengaluru Karnataka through its Manager.

2.       ICICI Bank Limited SCF 22-23, Kaula Park, Sangrur  Pincode 148001 through its Manager.  

                                                                                                                                    ….Opposite parties.

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:          Shri Sonu Markan Advocate                          

 

FOR  OPP. PARTY  NO.1  :            Shri Sandip Goyal,  Advocate                          

 

FOR  OPP. PARTY  NO.2  :            Shri G.S.Shergill,  Advocate                          

 

 

Quorum

                            

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg,  Member

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

                 

 

ORDER:  

 

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Krishan Kumar, complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that  he online purchased a Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 Black 4G+64G mobile phone  amounting Rs.12999/-  and payment was made  through mobile net banking from his ICICI bank account bearing account number 342101515293. After about one week, delivery boy of Blue Dart Services came to deliver the mobile phone and demanded  ID  proof of complainant. As per ID proof  the permanent address  is of Sunam  but the  address mentioned on shipping  confirmation  was #24, Sunami Gate, Phirmi Road, Sangrur  and as such delivery boy  refused to deliver the mobile phone. The complainant sent email to OP no.1 regarding non delivery of mobile phone and requested to refund his money. On 23.06.2017 complainant received an email from OP no.1 in which it was mentioned that the request for refund  the money has already been initiated on 25.04.2017 from their end and mentioned the bank ARN reference number 74056637116711509221164 but till today the complainant had not received the amount. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to refund an amount  of Rs.12999/- ,   

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- on account mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by the OP no.1, it is submitted that OP no.1 duly informed the complainant  that since the product purchased by the complainant was not delivered, a refund has been initiated on  April 25, 2017 vide request ID-4009573190 and bank ARN number 75503727035011680387147. The complainant was also duly informed that the refund has been processed in favour of the complainant.  It is further submitted that the complainant has provided  the bank statement only upto April 18,2018. However, refund has been processed on April 25,2017. Therefore, the complainant may be directed to present an approved bank  statement upto April 30,2018 so that if the refund is not reflected the OP no.1 would enquire into the same and provide proper remedy.

3.             In reply filed by the OP no.2, it is submitted that no amount as alleged in the complaint was ever received in the bank account bearing no.342101515293 of complainant from OP no.1. The complainant is very much aware about the said fact that no amount was received in his bank account but despite that the complainant has unnecessarily dragged the OP no.2 into uncalled litigation.  

 

4.             The complainant has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-11and closed evidence. On the other hand OPs have tendered documents Ex.OP1/1, Ex.OP2/1 to Ex.OP2/5 and closed evidence.

5.             The main dispute in the present complaint is regarding non-refund of payment of an amount of Rs.12999/- by the OP no.1 which was paid by the complainant to the OP no.1 at the time of order for purchase of the mobile set in question.

6.             It is an admitted fact on record that mobile set in question was not delivered to the complainant due to mismatch of his address. The complainant has stated in his complaint that he received a email from OP no.1 in which the OPs  had mentioned that  refund of money  has already been initiated on 25.04.2017 but he had not received any amount till today.

7.             On the other hand, the OP no.1 has specifically stated that the refund has been initiated on  April 25, 2017 vide request ID-4009573190 and bank ARN number 75503727035011680387147. The complainant was also duly informed that the refund has been processed in favour of the complainant.  It is further submitted that the complainant has provided  the bank statement only upto April 18,2018. However, refund has been processed on April 25,2017. Therefore, the complainant may be directed to present an approved  bank  statement upto April 30,2018 so that if the refund is not reflected the OP no.1 would enquire into the same and provide proper remedy. The OP no.2 has also stated that no amount as alleged in the complaint was ever received in the bank account bearing no.342101515293 of complainant from OP no.1.

8.             The complainant has produced on record  copy of his transaction inquiry  statement of account number 342101515293 for a period from 02.01.2017 to 28.03.2018 which is Ex.C-11. From the perusal of it, we do not find any transaction/ entry regarding deposit of Rs.12999/- on account of refund of the mobile set amount.  The Op no.2 has also produced on record transaction inquiry  of complainant's account for the period from 24.2.2018 to 29.04.2017 Ex.OP2/2 wherein the position is the same.  The OP no.2 has also produced statement of transactions in savings account number 342101515293 in INR for the period  from 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 which is Ex.OP2/5 on record. The OP no.1 has not produced on record any document which could show that the amount had been deposited by OP no.1 in the account of the complainant. As such Op no.1 has totally failed to prove their case that the payment was made to the complainant. So, we find that refund was not made to the complainant by the Op no.1.

9.             For the reasons recorded above, we find merit in the present complaint and as such same  is allowed against the Op no.1 only.  Accordingly, we allow the complaint and direct the OP no.1 to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.12999/- as cost of the mobile set. We further order the OP no.1 to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5000/-  on account of mental pain, agony, harassment and litigation.

10.           This order of ours shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. A copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                       

                Announced

                June 13, 2018

 

 

                   ( Vinod Kumar Gulati)   (SaritaGarg)  ( Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                                                                                                

Member                   Member                   President