Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/147/2021

Mr. Sahil Gaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Myntra - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

12 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	147/2021
Date of Institution	:	04.03.2021
Date of Decision	:	12.12.2022

 

                     

            

 

Mr.Sahil Gaur resident at H.No.127, Sector 21-A, Chandigarh.

                 ...  Complainant.

Versus

 

M/s Myntra, Buildings Alyssa, Begonia & Clover, Embassy Tech Village, Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanahalli Village Bengaluru, Bangalore, KA 560103.

 

…. Opposite Party.

 

BEFORE:
	SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA,	PRESIDING MEMBER
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Argued by:-
	Complainant in person.
	Sh.Atul Sharma, Advocate for OP.

 

   

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.     Briefly stated, the facts of case as alleged by the complainant are that  he ordered a Nike Joy Ride Running Shoes through the website of the OP for Rs.14,995/-. After receiving the consignment, the same was found to be different from the ordered one. Immediately, he raised the issue with the OP and asked for return and refund of the money.  Later on, he received a message from the customer care that his claim was declined as they were not returning the product.  He approached the OP many times and even also got served a legal notice dated 16.01.2021 upon the OP but to no effect.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OP amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint. 
2.     In its written statement, the OP has stated that the whole grievance pertains to the alleged delivery of a wrong product instead of the ordered product.  However, the product was purchased from third party seller who had sold & supplied the same to the complainant through third party logistic service provider and thus, the OP never came in possession of the actually ordered product or the alleged wrong product at any point of time. It has further been averred that they escalated the grievance of the complainant to the seller and tried to resolve the grievance to the maximum extent of its intermediary capacity by giving proper resolution of the same. However, as per the information provided by the seller,  the correct product was delivered by the independent logistic provider in a sealed packed condition and within a speculative time and the same is also evident from the screenshot of the CCTV footage.  Moreover, the complainant has not alleged any tampering with the seal or the packaging of the product. It has further been averred that Mynta Platform is an electronic market place model e-commerce platform which acts as an intermediary to facilitate sale transactions between the independent third party sellers and independent end customers. The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on its part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
3.     We have heard the complainant in person, Counsel for the OP and have gone through the documents on record.
4.     The grievance of the complainant is that the OP had delivered different item from the ordered one. However, the same has been vehemently refuted by the OP by stating that as per the information provided by the seller, the correct product was delivered by the independent logistic provider in a sealed packed condition and within a stipulated time and the same is also evident from the screenshot of the CCTV footage. The burden is shifted upon the complainant to prove the same by placing on record some documentary evidence regarding the booking of the product to show that the item delivered was different from the ordered one. However, he has not been able to place on record any documentary evidence to this effect. In the absence of any concreate evidence regarding the booking of the item, it cannot be ascertained that the item delivered was a different one from the item booked. Besides this, it is not understood that as to why the complainant has not made the seller who had sold the product as a party in the complaint. The complainant is, thus, failed to make out any case of unfair trade practice against the OP.
5.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.
6.     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced 12/12/2022
	Sd/- (PRITI MALHOTRA) PRESIDING MEMBER
	Sd/-
	(B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER