DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI
C.C NO.40 OF 2015
Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra - President.
Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik - Member.
Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy - Member
Rabinarayan Choudhury Postal Assistant, Phulbani HO
Kandhamal, Odisha – 762001Mob+91-9778236897
&+91-9861512364 Email-
Versus.
1.Yepme.com Anupam Roy
Khasara No-201/09 12,22 Min 26 in Revenue Estate
Of bhora Kalan Gurgaon C/O-3-Commerce Centre
Industrial Complex Contact -0124-4750200
Email- refund @yepme.com
2.DTDC, Bhubaneswar
Bhaskar Tower, Ground Floor Plot No-73, Kharvel Nagar
Bhubaneswar-751001 Ph- 0674-30435118
Email- customersupport @ dtdc.com ……………………..OPP. Parties.
For the Complainant: Self .
For the OPP. Parties : Sri V.V. Ramadas, Advocate for O.P No.1
Sri Nihar kanta Patra, Advocate for O.P No.2
Date of Order: 31-08-2016
O R D E R
The case of the Complainant in brief is that he has placed an order before O.P No.1 to send 2 shirts and 2 shoos as per on line shopping system of the Company vide order No. 155459. He was informed by mail that the order has been dispatched by D.T.D.C Courier, O.P No.2 and the delivery date was 29th August 2015. As he was unable to get delivery by the said date he contacted the customer care on 16th September 2015 and came to know that the parcel was returned back to sender from B.B.S.R office. He requested both the company to send again but both of them denied and refunded back his money. As he has placed order to use the products on the festive occasion of
-2-
Ganesh Puja, he was mentally harassed due to negligence of both the parties. Hence, this complaint was filed by him with a claim of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation from the O.Ps with a written apology.
The case of the O.P No.1 as per his version is that he is brand operated by the Growthways Trading Pvt. Ltd. the registered company and engaged in providing online shopping platform for the customers’ to buy the products listed on the site as per the terms and conditions. The Complainant has placed an order bearing ID No. 15005459 on 29-08-2015. The O.P No.1 acknowledged the said order. The said order was dispatched on 31-08-2015 through O.P No.2 at the given address. As per the Email dated 21-09-2015 from O.P No.2 the said order was refused by the Complainant and hence, it was returned. In view of the above situation the Complainant requested on 16-09-2015 to refund the amount deposited by him and the said refund was processed through E B S with Bank reference No. 526770017146 on 24-09-2015. Despite complete refund, the O.P No.1 also offered him a coupon code for value of Rs. 200/- as a good will gesture. So, the O.P No.1 is not liable to pay any amount of compensation as there was no negligence on his part.
The case of the O.P No.2 as per his version is that the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief against the O.P No.2 as the averments made in Para 3 of the petition are false and fabricated . Hence, no compensation be awarded in favor of the Complainant and the Complaint petition is liable to be dismissed with costs.
We have heard the Complainant as well as the counsel of both the O.Ps .we have gone through the complaint petition, the version filed by the O.P No.1 and O.P No.2 separately and the documents filed by both the parties in support of their case. It is submitted by the learned counsel of the O.P No.1 that there was no cause of action in favor of the Complainant to file the complaint against the O.P No.1and there is no allegation of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P No.1. So the ingredients of C.P Act are not attracted.
The learned counsel of the O.P No.2 has also submitted that the case of the Complainant utterly fails for want of cause of action against the O.P No.2 for which the complainant is not entitled to get any relief.
In this circumstances the sole point for consideration is that Whether the Complainant had refused to receive the delivery as alleged by the O.ps. It reveals from the version of the O.P No.1 that he has received the email from the O.P No.2 on 21-09-2015 regarding the refusal of the Complainant. But nothing is reflected in the version of the O.P no.2 regarding such refusal of the Complainant. The O.P No.2 also failed to produce any material document in support of this claim. Hence, the plea taken by the O.Ps that the Complainant had refused to receive the products of his order has no merit. It is submitted by the Complainant that the O,P No.2 has a branch at Phulbani and the branch office of Phulbani has not received the products from O.P No.2. However non compliance of the delivery of the products by O.P No.2 amounts deficiency in service and negligence on his part. The O.P No.2 failed to adduce any material evidence in support of his case. Hence, the Complaint filed by the Complainant is allowed.
-3-
Accordingly the O.P No.2 is directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- to the Complainant as compensation for his mental agony within 30 days from the receipt of this order. In case of failure the Complainant will be entitled to get 10 % annum interest from the date of this order till the date of payment.
The C.C is disposed of. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties at an early date.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
