BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE.
DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2021
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 453/2021
|
Amazon Seller Services Private Limited, Rep. through its authorized signatory,
Mr. Rahul Sundaram,
Senior Corporate Counsel,
has its registered office at :
Brigade Gateway, 8th Floor,
No.26/1, Dr. Raj Kumar Road,
Malleshwaram (W),
Bangalore 560 055.
(By Sri Diwakar)
|
……Appellant/s
|
V/s
|
1.
|
Sri D. Raja,
Resident of 52, 7th Cross Road, Green Garden Layout, Munnekollal,
Bengaluru 560 037.
|
…Respondent/s
|
|
2.
|
Amazon Transportation Services Private Limited,
Ground Floor, Eros Plaza,
Eros Corporate Centre,
Nehru Place,
New Delhi 100 19.
|
|
ORDER ON ADMISSION
BY MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI , MEMBER
1. The appellant/Opposite Party has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.09.02.2021 passed in CC.No.634/2018 on the file of 1st Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore.
2. The facts leading to the appeal are as under;
It is the case of the complainant that the Opposite Party No.1 operates as online shopping website and Opposite Party No.2 is its courier/logistic partner. The complainant placed order to purchase one Yellow Gold Chain Necklace ORRA 22K (916) with Opposite Party No.1 on 27.04.2017 at 2.33 p.m. The said order was confirmed by Opposite Party No.1 and the same was shipped to his address on 03.05.2017 through Opposite Party No.2. The same was delivered on 06.05.2017 at 11.00 a.m. After receiving the same and opening the same, he found that the product supplied was completely of different design and of poor quality against the order placed. He raised an issue with Opposite Party No.1 at 6.27 p.m. on 06.05.2017 demanding for arranging to take back the said product and to pay the amount. On 11.05.2017 an agent from Opposite Party No.1 came to his house to pickup the product. He inspected the same and took back the same by providing an acknowledgement and also assured that the refund will be processed within 5 working business days. Inspite of it, the amount was not refunded. Many emails were exchanged inspite of it, the Opposite Party No.1 has not responded nor refunded the amount which amounts to unfair trade practice and also supplying a wrong product other than the one ordered amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the complaint.
3. Upon service of notice, the Opposite Party No.1 appeared before the Commission and filed its version. The Opposite Party No.2 even though served remained absent and hence, placed exparte. In the version, the Opposite Party No.1 contended that it only provides platform on online market place were independent third party suggest the list of their products for sale. They neither sell nor offer any products. The seller themselves are responsible for respective listing and their products on their website. This Opposite Party is neither responsible for
Back
