Punjab

Sangrur

CC/1345/2021

Gaurav Arora - Complainant(s)

Versus

Myntra Designs Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Rishav Sardana

02 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                        Complaint No. 1345

 Instituted on:   08.11.2021

                                                                         Decided on:     02.02.2023

 

Gaurav Arora son of Sh. Pawan Kumar, R/o H.No.436, Street No.6, Kishan Bagh Colony, Sangrur, District Sangrur.

                                                          …. Complainant.     

                                                 Versus

1.     Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. Building Alyssa, Begonia and Clover, situated in Embassy Tech Village, Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanhali, Village Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru 560010 India through its Managing Director.

2.     Savan Retailers Private Limited, 10, Cabin No.17, PVR Plaza Building, H Block, Connaught Circus, Delhi through its authorized signatory.

3.     Myntra Logistics, Delivery Centre, Near Nam Dev Gurudwara, Sangrur 148001 through its authorized signatory.

             ….Opposite parties 

For the complainant:                   : Shri Rishav Sardana, Adv.              

For the OPa                                 : Exparte.

 

Quorum                                          

Jot Naranjan Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

Kanwaljeet Singh, Member

 

ORDER

SARITA GARG, MEMBER.      

1.             Complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties pleading that the complainant is a consumer of the OP by getting booked an Adidas Men Grey and Black Woven design essence Indoor shoes on 18.7.2021 vide order Id number 117847974189534684003 which was delivered to the complainant on 21.7.2021 and paid an amount of Rs.4274/- in cash to OP number 3.  The grievance of the complainant is that after opening the shoes, he found that it was not an Adidas product rather the same was different/unnamed brand and the tags of the shoes were also missing. The complainant immediately approached OP number 3 to return the product but he refused to do so. The complainant approached OP number 1 and requested for return/replacement of the shoes on 21.7.2021 which was registered as IN21072119235450745692 dated 21.7.2021 and the complainant was assured that his grievance shall be redressed by 24.7.2021, but nothing was done. The employee of the OP also refused to pick up the shoes saying that it was different product. As such, nothing was done by the OPs despite repeated requests of the complainant. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Opposite parties be directed to refund the amount of Rs.4274/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum and further to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, tension and harassment and further to pay Rs.15,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

2.             Record shows that the OPs did not appear despite service, as such,  they were proceeded against exparte.

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant produced evidence. Ex.C-2 is the invoice of the shoes dated 18.7.2021 and Ex.C-3 are the copies of messages and Ex.C-1 is the affidavit of the complainant.

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued vehemently that the complainant is a consumer of the OPs by getting booked an Adidas Men Grey and Black Woven design essence Indoor shoes on 18.7.2021 vide order Id number 117847974189534684003, copy of which on record is Ex.C-2 and the product was delivered to the complainant on 21.7.2021 and paid an amount of Rs.4274/- in cash to OP number 3, who delivered the product in question. The learned counsel for the complainant has further contended that when the complainant opened the pack of shoes, then he found that it was not an Adidas product rather the same was different/unnamed brand and the tags of the shoes were also missing. The complainant immediately approached OP number 3 to return the product but he refused to do so. The complainant approached OP number 1 and requested for return/replacement of the shoes on 21.7.2021 which was registered as IN21072119235450745692 dated 21.7.2021 and the complainant was assured that his grievance shall be redressed by 24.7.2021, but nothing was done. Further the learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the employee of the OPs also refused to pick up the shoes saying that it was a different product. As such, nothing was done by the OPs despite repeated requests of the complainant.  Accordingly, the complainant has sought the refund of the amount.

5.             Ex.C-2 is the copy of invoice showing that the complainant ordered the product Adidas shoes UK7 on 18.7.2021 for Rs.4274/- which was received by the complainant on 21.7.2021, but the OPs sent the wrong product to the complainant whereas the complainant had ordered Adidas shoes. When the complainant complained the OP number 2 regarding wrong delivery of the product in question then the OPs  sent a message to the complainant saying that “you can expect the issue to be resolved by Sat, 24 July, 2021.”  The complainant has also produced on record the photocopy of the product  ‘Adidas’ which was ordered by the complainant and has also produced photocopy of the product which was supplied by the OPs and the supplied product does not carry any brand name.  All the above said evidence is supported by the sworn affidavit of the complainant.  It is worth mentioning here that the OPs chose to remain exparte, as such, we will go with the unrebutted evidence of the complainant. In the circumstances, we find that the complainant has successfully proved his case.   

6.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OPs to refund/pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.4274/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 08.11.2021 till realization. We also order the complainant to return the old shoes to the OPs. We further direct OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.2000/- as compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment and litigation expenses. 

7.             The complaint could not be decided within the statutory time period due to heavy pendency of cases.

8.             This order of ours be complied with within a period of sixty days of its communication. A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

Pronounced.

                        February 2, 2023.