Orissa

Debagarh

CC/7/2021

Arun Tanay Samal, age 32 years, S/O-Sri Antaryami Samal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Head of the Department, Amazon Seller (Amazon.in) - Opp.Party(s)

04 Dec 2021

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEOGARH

C.C NO-07/2021

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Arati Das, Member.

Arun Tanay Samal, age 32 years,

S/O-Sri Antaryami Samal,

At-Mahuldhipasahi,Ward No-11,

P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh,Odisha.

Pin-768108.                                                                                       ...Complainant.

                                                                           -Versus-

Head of the Department,

Amazon Seller (Amazon.in)

Brigade Gateway, 8th floor,

 26/1, Dr. Rajkumar Road,

Malleshwaram (W), Bangalore-560055.                                             …O.P

Counsels:-

For the Complainant             :- Memo.

For the O.P-1                         :- Sri. T.K.Dhal & Associates, Advocates.

Date of Hearing: 26.11.2021, Date of Order: 04.12.2021

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:-Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant on dtd. 13.01.2021made an online purchase a “Arshia Fashion Denim Dress” from Amazon.in with Cash on Delivery system. He received a message on his mobile phone about the confirmation of the acceptance of the above order vide no.-402-8826618-5553137. As per the order summary the total amount payable by the complainant was Rs.999/- on receipt of the order. The Complainant time to time received several message relating to the delivery of the order, passing through different courier service hubs/station to inform the Complaint and track the order. On dtd.16.01.2021 at 6.35 A.M, the Complainant received a message that the product has arrived at a Courier facility at Deogarh and out for delivery at 7.50 A.M. He waited hopefully for the order but at 5.07 P.M, he received another message that the “Package Cancelled” which made him surprised as he has not cancelled the order. He made contact with the O.P on the toll free number and the person other who introduced himself as the authorised service provider of the O.P and begged apology for the inconvenience occurred and assured him to streamline the order. After two days on dtd. 21.01.2021 at 5.24 P.M a message confirming the return of the product to the seller was received by the Complainant on his mobile phone as “Return Complete”. The Complainant has ordered the above product for a special occasion i.e to make a gift to someone special where some emotions and sentiments were attached but due to the negligent act of the O.P, the Complainant has lost his social image, unable to maintain his personality and shape his dreams on that particular occasion. The Complainant has now feels that, he has been harassed by the O.P and going through with mental pain due to irresponsible and negligent and careless acts of the O.P.

         The O.P stated that Amazon is an online marketplace i.e www.amazon.in and mobile application namely Amazon Shopping where independent third party sellers list their products for sale. Any third party seller is free to list any product for sale and any buyer is free to choose and order any product from any seller selling that product on the e-commerce marketplace. As per section 79 of the IT Act ASSPL is an intermediary  is not for any information ,materials, warranties, representations made by the independent third party sellers on the e-commerce marketplace.   As per the O.P against an order placed by the Complainant an invoice bearing no- IN-CCU1-69 dtd.13.01.2021(invoice) was issued by the independent third party seller i.e.  Arshia Fashion. The contract of sale was executed between the Complainant and the third party seller. The Complainant had opted for COD mode of payment. The said order was packed, sealed and shipped by the third party seller. The present dispute pertains to alleged non-delivery of Product by the independent third party seller but the Complainant failed to implead the third party seller.  As the Complainant contacted the customer care service of ASSPL alleging that he had not receive the product  for which the order was placed On contact with the third party seller ,the ASSPL came to know that the product is lost in transit. Again as the product was lost in the hand of the third party seller, then he is responsible for the non delivery of the item.  ASSPL Does not sell any products to the buyers and neither does ASSPL advertose or endorse any specific products or services on the e-commerce marketplace or anywhere else. The transaction of sale of the product and a valid contract for sale existed only between the independent third party seller and the complainant. The O.P placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Bharti Knitting company vrs. DHL Worldwide Express courier Division of Alrfreight ltd.” and in the case of “M.C Chaco VRs. Travancore AIR 1970 SC 504”. Also he placed reliance on the matter of “RCI India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Parthsarathy in R.P No-443 of 2007”.Again he submits that the Complainant is not a consumer of the O.P as per section 35 of C.P Act-2019 this is a case of misjoinder party.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

        From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has placed an ordered in the website of the O.P to purchase a “Arshia Fashion Denim Dress” via Amazon.com on dtd. 13.01.2021 vide Order ID no- 402-8826618-5553137. He amount payable was in COD mode for Rs. 999/-.  The said Dress was not delivered to the Complainant till 16.01.2021 and a message was received by the complainant on his mobile phone that the Package cancelled. Again it is seen that the O.P-1 is a company engaged in providing trading/selling facilities over the internet through its websites www.Amazon.com and mobile application collectively referred as Amazon Platform. Though it provides an electronic Platform which acts as an intermediary to facilitate sale transaction between independent third party sellers and independent end customers, the Complainant after seeing the advertisement/offer in the website of the O.P and going through the features of the product placed an order. The Complainant has not direct link with the independent third party seller. It is the O.P who allowed the independent third party seller to sell his product in his platform. Again the O.P has the responsibility to provide the customer the items/products which were displayed for sale online and against which the customers are placing orders after going through their features and different aspect as their need/requirements and expectations.  It should not be the practice that whatever the Independent Third Party Seller offered for sale, the O.P simply forward the same to the customers/end users.   Also it is inferred that the business of the O.P falls within the definition of an intermediary under section 2(1)(w) of the Information and Technology Act,2000. As an intermediary the O.P is protected by the provisions of section 79 of I.T act-2000. The role of the O.P. is limited to that of a facilitator, and the products available on the Website of the O.P are sold by third party sellers.  The complainant placed an order for the Product, manufactured by the Independent Third Party seller, from the website of the O.P,  hence  the O.P is with the direct linkage with the Complainant  and responsible for every unfair trade practice committed by the  Independent Third Party Seller thus misusing the website of the O.P. Again the O.P here trying to shift the burden to the shoulder of the Third Party seller just to become escape from the responsibility.  Again there is no privity of contact between the Complainant and the third party seller. The Complainant has purchased the product from one of the sellers listed on Amazon Platform which is evident from the copy of seller tax invoice which clearly states that the order is THRUOGH Amazon. Here liability to provide after sale service rest on the O.P. Admittedly, the opposite party was facilitator between the seller and buyers (complainant) as mentioned in the terms and conditions for Amazon Shopping (OP) in the column Online Shopping Platform. It was the duty of the O.P to inform the Complainant as to how the goods could be returned to the seller. As per terms and conditions the seller had undertaken to replace the product at no cost in case the buyer informed the seller within 30 days of the delivery of product. In this case the Complainant has sent a request for return to the O.P-1 but the O.P-1 did not respond and ultimately informed that the return request is already closed  which is before 30 days thus violating the terms and condition of online sale. This matter has been well settled in the case of “Rediff.Com India Limited vs Ms. Urmil Munjal on 11 April, 2013 by National Consumer Disputes Redressal, New Delhi”. Hence we order as under-:

                                                                                                ORDER.

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- for the harassment, mental pain and agony caused to the Complainant and he is further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/-(Five Thousand) as litigation expenses.  All the above orders are to be carried out within 30 (Thirty) days of receiving of this order, failing which, the complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.  

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 4^th day of December-2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

I agree,                                                                                            

 

MEMBER                                                                                                       PRESIDENT.

                                                            Dictated and Corrected

                                                                            By me.

                                                         

            PRESIDENT.