SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 1114

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MS. BIMLA KUMARI, Presiding Member
Mr. Amit Bharana – Appellant
Versus
Mobulous Technologies Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
CC No. 891/2015



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rakesh Kumar
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajeev Goswami

Deficiency in service established due to failure to deliver contracted services, leading to financial loss and mental anguish, resulting in a refund order with interest and compensation.

Headnote:(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 2(1)(g) - Deficiency in service - Complainant engaged Opposite Party for mobile app development, paid Rs.18,60,000/- but no milestones completed; Opposite Party ceased communication and failed to deliver, causing financial loss and mental trauma - Complaint allowed with refund ordered along with interest and compensation for mental agony. (Paras 1-24)

(B) Evidence - Unchallenged testimony of Complainant accepted due to Opposite Party's failure to present a defense. (Paras 20-21)

(C) Jurisdiction - Opposite Party's claim of misjoinder and lack of pecuniary jurisdiction dismissed. (Paras 7-8)

Table of Content
1. factual background of the complaint (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. opposite party's defense and counterclaims (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
3. court's analysis of evidence and arguments (Para 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
4. final decision and order (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT

1. Brief f acts of the case are that the Opposite Party No. 1 is a Mobile App Developer Company. In the last quarter of the year 2014, the Opposite Parties met with the Complainant and represented themselves as pioneer and expert in the field of development and management of mobile apps. Thereafter, Master Agreement dated 03.12.2024 (hereinafter referred to as Agreement) was executed between the Complainant and the Opposite Party No. 1 for creation of mobile apps for the Complainant in the name of “Conncct”, “Bakkrr”, “Tikkrr” and “Snakkoo.”

2. It is the case of Complainant that repeatedly assurances were given by the Opposite Parties that they would deliver the finalized version of apps within the time limit so that he could launch the apps as per his parameters, promises and confirmation. Thus, the Complainant paid the substantial amount of Rs.18,60,000/- to the Opposite Parties by cheque by the end of January, 2015. The contractual obligation was divided into seven time bound milestones, which were never completed by Opposite Parties, thereby causing huge losses to the Complainant. The Opposite Parties did not deliver even a single project in time despite receiving all the payments well in advance from the Complainant. Moreover, the time was essence of the agreement. Since, the Complainant had pre-scheduled the soft launch of apps, engagement of vendors, registration, etc., and deadline for completion of work was coming ahead, the Complainant and his colleagues, time and again, reminded the Opposite Parties telephonically and e-mails to complete the assignment, but of no avail. In the month of January, 2015, the Opposite Parties completely shutdown communication with the Complainant and did not respond to his queries, calls and e- mails. Thereafter, as a last resort and under frustration and desperation, the Complainant gave the assignment/job of apps development to other company and the mandate given by to the Opposite Parties was withdrawn by the Complainant vide e-mail. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties sent shocking e-mail to the Complainant and falsely claimed that they were withdrawing from the projects/assignments of the Complainant. The same was done by the Opposite Parties in a pre-planned manner and malafidely, illegally and deliberately in order to harass the Complainant and to misappropriate his hard-earned money. The Opposite Parties also tried to blackmail and extort further money from the Complainant and bogus and shame assignments were falsely shown by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant. The whole assignment was ruined by the Opposite Parties and the dreams of the Complainant, to develop his own venture by way of self- employment, was completely shattered.

3. It is the further case of Complainant that the Opposite Parties never had experts, professionals and infrastructure to execute the assignment given to them and they lured, trapped and cheated the Complainant due to which he suffered harassment, trauma and stress which cannot be compensated in terms of money.

4. The Complainant also made a police complaint against the Opposite Parties and also sent a legal notice dated 07.05.2015 to the Opposite Parties, which was duly served upon the Opposite Parties, who sent a false and frivolous reply to the legal notice.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conduct of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant filed the complaint, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties and prayed for refund of his amount of Rs.18,62,699/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. and a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- towards compensation and also prayed for the award of litigation expenses.

6. Notice of the compl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top