| Complaint Case No. CC/23/108 | | ( Date of Filing : 04 May 2023 ) |
| | | | 1. Vikar Kumar | | #30057, Street No.1, Gopal Nagar, Bathinda |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. Firstcry | | Rajshree Business PArk Plot No.114, Survey No.338, Tadiwala Road, Nr.Sohrab Hall, Pune |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA C.C.No. 108 of 04-05-2023 Decided on : 29-05-2024 Vikas Kumar S/o Ramesh Kumar Age 32, R/o #30057, St. No.1, Gopal Nagar, Bathinda. ........Complainant Versus Firstcry Head Office Add. Rajashree Business Park, Plot No.114, Survey No.338, Tadiwala Road, Nr. Sohrab Hall, Pune-411001. Digital Age Retail Pvt. Ltd., Indospace Luhari, 3E Pvt. Ltd, VPO Luhari, Pataudi-Kulana Road, MDR 132, Tehsil Jajhajjar and Distt Jhajjar-124108. (Deleted)
.......Opposite parties Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 QUORUM Smt.Priti Malhotra, President Smt.Sharda Attri, Member Present : Complainant : Sh.Vikas Kumar in person. For opposite parties : Opposite party No.1 ex-parte. Opposite party No.2 deleted. ORDER Priti Malhotra, President The complainant Vikas Kumar (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Firstcry and another (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties). Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that opposite parties for promoting their sale and earning more and more profits from their customers, offered many offers of the discounts in percentages (%) from the total M.R.P amount of the product. It is alleged that the complainant saw the offers given by opposite parties on the web portal of opposite party No.l. The detail or particulars of the offer price was given by opposite parties are as below:
SCREEN SHOT PERTICULARS:EX. C1 PRICE: dISCOUNT (-)
SHIPPING: |
Rs.315.21/- (MRP. 399-83.79 Discount)= Rs.315.21/-
Rs.15.36/- | | TOTAL:330.57/- |
It is further alleged that on seeing the offer, on 11.3.2023, complainant placed the order for purchase BabyHug Cotton Half Sleeves Mickey Mouse T-shirt, sold by opposite party No.2 through online web portal of opposite party No.1. He processed the payment through debit card mode and order was successfully confirmed on the end of opposite parties vide order No.4439924PEAF4BCFB7, but amount of Rs.380.57/- was deducted from the debit card. He received the product from opposite parties and its bill showed that opposite parties charged Rs.65.36/- as shipping charges plus convenience charges instead of offerred shipping charges of Rs.15.16/-. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to opposite parties to pay Rs.50/- as loss on account of extra amount paid on discounted product and loss of account of shipping charges plus convenience charges of Rs.65.36/- and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.25,000/-. Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.1. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against it. In view of statement suffered by complainant on 20.2.2024, the name of opposite party No.2 was deleted from the array of opposite parties. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 4.5.2023, (Ex.C1) and documents, (Ex.C2 to Ex.C9). We have heard the complainant and gone through the file carefully. The complainant has reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint as detailed above. We have given careful consideration to these submissions. The dispute in this case is that on 11.3.2023, complainant has placed online order for purchase BabyHug Cotton Half Sleeves Micky Mouse T-shirt on the web portal of opposite party No.1 and made payment vide debit card. Order detail, (Ex.C2) and bill, (Ex.C5) prove this fact. The complainant has placed on record screenshot of offer given by opposite party No.1 in which product price was given after discount as Rs.315.21/- plus shipping charges as Rs.15.36/- i.e. total Rs.330.57/-, but when he made online transaction vide debit card, then Rs.380.57/- was debited from his account instead of Rs.330.57/-. As such, opposite party No.1 has charged extra amount of Rs.50/- from the complainant. Moreover opposite party No.1 has not come forward to contest the complaint of the complainant. Therefore, evidence of the complainant attached with sworn affidavit goes unrebutted and unchallanged. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant. Thus, there is deficiency in services and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party No.1. In view of what has been discussed above, present complaint is partly allowed with Rs.500/- as cost and compensation against opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.1 is directed to refund extra amount charged by it i.e. Rs.50/- to the complainant. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case of non-compliance of the order within the stipulated period, thereafter opposite parties will be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room. Announced 29-05-2024 - (Priti Malhotra)
President (Sharda Attri) Member
| |
