DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ERNAKULAM

       Dated this the 29^th day of July 2023

                             Filed on: 15/10/2018

PRESENT

Shri.D.B.Binu                                                                            President

Shri.V.Ramachandran                                                               Member

Smt.Sreevidhia.T.N                                                                   Member                                                                   

C.C No.432/2018

COMPLAINANT

Sreerag V.P., S/o.Rajan V.P., Valiya Parambath House,
Puthuppadi P.O., Ernakulam, Pin-686 673

Vs.

OPPOSITE PARTY

1. Sanjay havit, V3 Sports India, Gauri Nandan Society Ground Floor, Behind Sushrut Hospital, Raigad Aali Marg, Al meda Road, Panch Pakhal Thane (W), Pin-400 601, Maharashtra
2. Ranjectdeshmukh, V3 Sports India, Gauri Nandan Society Ground Floor, Behind Sushrut Hospital, Raigad Aali Marg, Al meda Road, Panch Pakhal Thane (W), Pin-400 601, Maharashtra

 F I N A L   O  R D E R

D.B.Binu, President

1. A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

The complaint is filed under Section 12 (1) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. The brief facts, as averred in the complaint the complainant ordered cricket bats worth Rs 65,000 from opposite parties on Facebook at a discounted price. They paid Rs 10,000 online as agreed. However, upon receiving the product, they found that the cricket bat was of very poor quality and valued at only Rs 500/-. The complainant is now demanding a refund of Rs 10,000 and additional compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh from the opposite parties due to the misrepresentation and dissatisfaction with the product received.

The case is posted to produce the correct address of the opposite parties, but the complainant failed to provide the required information despite multiple opportunities. On several occasions, the complainant was absent and unrepresented during the proceedings. The notice sent to the complainant was not successfully delivered as per the proof of delivery from the Postal Department. Despite efforts by the commission to obtain the correct address, the complainant did not furnished it and had not turned up thereof.

Due to the complainant's continuous absence and failure to furnish the correct address of the opposite parties, the commission found it impossible to serve the notice and proceed with the case. As a result, the complaint was closed due to the complainant's default.

Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 29^th day of July 2023

   Sd/-                  

D.B.Binu, President

                                                                             Sd/-                  

                                                                    V.Ramachandran, Member

                                                         Sd/-                  

                                                                      Sreevidhia.T.N, Member

Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                                                           Assistant Registrar