Pushpal vs. noti android#
In the result, this complaint case succeeds.Īll the charge claimed by the Opposite Parties regarding failed transaction dated including ₹429/- vide Credit Card No.5459 6492 0078 0772 is hereby set aside.Today's device combinations can give in the most peculiar results and that we would never have thought before that they could happen, especially when iPhone dominated any Android phone a few years ago. Moreover, there is nothing before this Commission to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant. Hence, Complainant is a consumer under Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and will entitle relief as prayed for. In my view, not settling the disputes is amount to deficiency of service U/S 2(11) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and Complainant has cause of action to file this case against the Opposite Parties. Hence I hold that the grievance of Complainant is genuine one. I did not find any laches on the part of Complainant. Inspite of several communications, Opposite Parties remained silent over the issue and continued made charges for non-payment of the said amount. It appears from the statement of account dated that the said amount has been debited from his account though the said transaction was failed due to technical ground. But the transaction was failed due to technical issue. It is the case of Complainant that after purchased of articles from Bazar Kolkata, Complainant made payment of ₹429/- through his credit card issued by the Opposite Parties. I have carefully perused the petition of complaint, evidence of Complainant and heard the argument on behalf of Complainant. Whether Complainant will entitle to get any relief / reliefs as prayed for or not?Īll these points are taken up together for sake of convenience and brevity. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties or not?
Whether Complainant has any cause of action to file this case or not? But all efforts were failed due to non-taking step by the Opposites. That on and, Complainant made reminder through e-mail and again submitted 'Progressive Dispute Letter' as per instruction of Opposites. Inspite of disputes raised by the Complainant, Opposite Parties were continued to make charge on the disputed amount along with financial charges.
Accordingly, Complainant was continuing to pay the balance. In reply, Opposite Parties assured the Complainant to solve the dispute very shortly and asked the Complainant to pay balance outstanding dues excluding the transaction in dispute. "Cardholder Dispute Form" on the same day in prescribed format of Opposite Parties raising his grievance. That the Complainant also submitted a duly filled up That the Complainant raised the dispute with regard to the said transaction through mail dated and requested the Opposite Parties to settle the dispute. However, an amount of ₹629/- (Rupees Six hundred and Twenty Nine only) vide transaction dated is shown as paid from said credit card as it reflects from the statement of account dated (Annexure-P-1). The Complainant was billed for a sum of ₹429/- (Rupees Four hundred and Twenty Nine only) but the same was reversed by Bazar Kolkata as the transaction was failed due to technical issue and it was informed by sending SMS in the registered mobile number of the Complainant. The said transaction was declined when the credit card was swiped in card swipe machine. That on, Complainant used the aforesaid card for the payment of articles purchased from Bazar Kolkata. Facts of this case, in short, is that, Complainant has taken a credit from Opposite Parties with maximum credit limit of ₹60,000/- (Rupees Sixty thousand only) vide Credit Card No.5459 6492 0078 0772. As a result, this complaint case is preceded ex parte against the Opposite Party No.2 and 3 and the name of Opposite Party No.3 has expunged by this Commission vide order no.10 dated. After receiving notice Opposite Party No.2 and 3 remained absent without any step.
0 kommentar(er)
