DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

1]   Alokik Bhasin s/o Sh. Anupam Bhasin, resident of #354, Block-B, Kurukshetra Hostel, PEC University of Technology, Sector 12, Chandigarh.

2]   Anmol Sahore s/o Dr. Brij Mohan Sahore, resident of #220, Block-A, Kurukshetra Hostel, PEC University of Technology, Sector 12, Chandigarh.

3]   Bakul Gupta s/o Subash Chander Gupta, resident of #104, Block-A, Kurukshetra Hostel, PEC University of Technology, Sector 12, Chandigarh.

              ---Complainants

Vs.

1]   Domino’s Pizza Store, SCF No.3, Sector 8-B, Chandigarh.

2]   North Regional Office:

     Domino’s Pizza India, AF 1-3, AF 46, 47, Aditya City Center Mall, Plot No. C/GH-3, Vaibhav Khand, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad – 201 014 (U.P).

3]   Jubliant Foodworks Limited, Regd. & Corporate Office: B-214, Phase-II, Noida – 201 305.

---- Opposite Parties

BEFORE:   MRS.MADHU MUTNEJA            PRESIDING MEMBER

SH. JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU    MEMBER

Argued By:    Complainants in person.

              Sh. Narender Pal Bhardwaj, Counsel for Opposite Parties.

PER MADHU MUTNEJA, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.          The Opposite Parties had advertised and published a scheme whereby they had claimed to deliver Pizzas within 30 minutes except for bulk orders. The Scheme was as under:-

“30 minutes or free”

Delivery was guaranteed at the first barrier point and was not applicable on New Year’s Eve, on Ganesh Festival, Christmas and Durga Pooja.

          Against the advertisement issued by the Opposite Parties, the Complainants had ordered two Pizzas through the Dominos website www.dominos.co.in dated 14.12.2012 at 8:51 p.m. as per Order No. 512 (Receipt Annexure C-1). The above mentioned ordered Pizzas were delivered at the wrong address and after more than 1 hr. 30 min.

          The Complainants have alleged that order numbers 525 and 528 which were placed by people familiar to the Complainants around 20 minutes later than the Complainants, were received 15-20 minutes earlier. All the orders mentioned were equivalent. Despite the undue delay in delivery of the Pizzas, the Complainants were ready to accept the Pizzas but to their utter dismay, when they opened the received Pizzas, they were all spoiled due to their insufficient packaging and were not even at edible temperature. Sub- standard quality had been supplied (Photographs attached). Thereafter, the Complainants tried to lodge their complaint at the Store, but no one received the call. They finally connected to a person who forged his identity as “Inder Kumar Sharma”.  

          The Complainants have also alleged that the concerned people at the store kept arguing for more than an hour and misguiding the Complainants to believe that it was their Company’s Policy that Complainants will have to pay for the Pizzas. The complaint was accordingly lodged on the website (Annexure C-3). The Complainants have further alleged that they received a call from the Opposite Parties stating that they can have the same order again free on any day of their choice. It is asserted that the free Pizzas cannot compensate for the mental harassment, agony and loss of precious time wasted in arguing caused to Complainants. The Complainants have alleged that the Pizzas were ordered to save the time during exams and since they were not in edible condition, the Complainants had to starve for the whole night. Alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, the Complainants have filed the present complaint, with a prayer for `36,000/- (`12,000/- per Complainant) for causing mental agony, harassment and humiliation caused.

2.          Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.

3.          Opposite Parties in their reply by way of affidavit have admitted the factual position about the offer and the order placed by the Complainants for the Pizzas. Opposite Parties have maintained that there was no delay in delivery of Pizzas. The address provided by the Complainant No.1 (Alokik Bhasin) in Annexure C-1 is “#220, Kurukshetra Hostel, Punjab Engineer College, Sector 12, Chandigarh”, which is inconsistent with the address given in the memo of parties i.e. “#354, Block-B, Kurukshetra Hostel, Punjab Engineer College”. As per 30 Minutes or Free home delivery policy, delivery of product will be considered as delivered as soon as delivery boy had reached the entrance of Punjab Engineering College. The Kurukshetra Hostel of the Punjab Engineering College is divided into Blocks i.e. Block-A and Block-B, but in the Order No. 512 (Annexure C-1), name of the Block was not mentioned. When the delivery boy reached the address given in the Order, no one was present there. On making a call at the given contact number, the customer asked the delivery boy to deliver the Pizzas at a different hostel room. The customer made the delivery boy to do this exercise again and again making him knock doors of 04 hostel rooms till he finally told him that now he is in Room No. 220. It is clear from the behavior of the customer that he was trying to take undue advantage of 30 Minutes or Free home delivery policy of the Opposite Parties. Other contentions as also the contention with regard to the quality of Pizzas have been denied.

          It is pleaded that the Complainants have not placed on record any report from any recognized Laborary nor any piece of the said Pizza before this Forum to be testified as per Rule 5 of the Chandigarh Consumer Protection Rules, 1987. The photographs on record neither bear time nor prove quality standards.

          Opposite Parties have further contended that the complete story of the Complainants is concocted and Opposite Parties never offered any commitment of sending fresh Pizza on any day to the Complainants, as Complainants are habitual of claiming free Pizzas. Annexure C-3 is a self-generated reply from the electronic system of the Opposite Party and this document nowhere makes such commitments of offering fresh Pizza. Denying all other allegations and stating that there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on their part, Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.  

4.          Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record, in support of their contentions.

5.          We have heard the Complainants in person and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties and have perused the record.

6.          There allegation of the Complainants is that the Pizzas ordered by them to the Opposite Parties have been delivered late. Also the Pizzas were of sub-standard quality. To prove their allegations, Complainants have placed on record photographs at Annexure C-2. As against it, Opposite Parties have contended that the Complainants are habitual of claiming free Pizzas and the reason for the delay was wrong address given by the Complainant No.1 (Alokik Bhasin). Also, the Complainant No.1 was not found at the given address and the delivery boy had to knock doors of 04 hostel rooms before the Pizzas were finally delivered in Room No. 220.   

7.          A perusal of the booking receipt (Annexure C-1) placed on record by the Complainant shows that Block No. of the Hostel has not been given and it would not be possible for a delivery boy to find the room allotted to the Complainant No.1 from amongst the different blocks so quickly. Hence, the delay caused can be easily over looked considering the contention of the Opposite Parties in the reply that the Complainants made the delivery boy go from room to room before accepting delivery. Otherwise, also there is no proof about the time/ exact period of delay when the Pizzas were delivered to the Complainants.

8.          Regarding the allegation of sub-standard Pizzas, the photographs on record are neither dated nor were the originals thereof produced on record by the Complainants. Moreover, quality of food products cannot be ascertained by means of photographs.

9.          Furthermore, the Complainants have failed produce on record any report from any recognized laboratory to prove the alleged bad quality. In these set of circumstances, the version of the Complainants about the sub-standard pizzas cannot be believed.  

10.        Hence we do not find any merit in the complaint as the allegations made by the Complainants are not substantiated by cogent evidence. We accordingly, dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

11.        The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

31^st May, 2013                            

Sd/-

(MADHU MUTNEJA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER