A consumer court in Odisha's Sundargarh district has delivered a strong verdict against an electronics retailer, ordering a significant payout to a customer who was wrongfully charged twice for a single mobile phone purchase. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has mandated a total payment of Rs 40,000 to the complainant for the store's negligence and service deficiency.
The Case of the Duplicate EMI Charges
The issue began on May 16, 2022, when Antanu Kerketta, a 33-year-old resident of Rasipatra village in Sundargarh, ordered a mobile phone using a credit card EMI facility. He selected the option to pick up the device from a showroom located in Sundargarh town. Upon visiting the store, a salesperson informed him that the booked item could not be dispatched to his provided address and suggested he place a fresh order instead.
Kerketta discovered there was no online option to cancel the initial order. He then requested a store representative to cancel it from their system and received assurances that they would handle it. Trusting this, Kerketta proceeded to book the same phone again using the identical process and successfully received the delivery.
Bank Statement Reveals Shocking Double Billing
The problem came to light when Kerketta's credit card statement was generated. He was shocked to find that the bill amount was double what he expected. The statement clearly indicated he was being charged for two separate EMI plans. Alarmed, Kerketta immediately contacted his bank's customer care service for clarification.
The bank, after reviewing the case, advised him to resolve the matter directly with the electronics store. Kerketta returned to the showroom and presented the statement as proof of the double billing. Following an internal inquiry, the store management admitted that his previous order had never been cancelled as promised, leading to the duplicate charges.
Two-Year Wait Ends with Consumer Court Intervention
Despite giving assurances that the issue would be escalated to a higher level and resolved, the store failed to take corrective action. The entire 24-month financing period concluded in April 2024, with Kerketta having paid the full EMI amount of Rs 19,999, which included interest and processing fees, for the order that was never supposed to exist.
Frustrated by the lack of resolution, Antanu Kerketta filed a formal complaint with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Sundargarh on March 3 of this year, naming the store in-charge as the opposite party.
Court's Verdict and Directives
The commission meticulously examined all records and evidence presented. It observed that due to the non-cancellation of the first order, Kerketta was forced to pay double EMIs, and the showroom had consequently received an excess payment of Rs 19,999. The bench ruled this as a clear case of deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the retailer.
Pronouncing the judgment on December 17, the commission issued the following directives to the store in-charge:
- Refund the principal amount of Rs 19,999 along with 6% annual interest calculated from the date of the first EMI receipt.
- Pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for the negligence and deficiency in service suffered by the complainant.
- Bear the litigation costs of Rs 5,000 incurred by Kerketta.
The court ordered the total amount to be paid within 30 days. It further stated that failure to comply would result in the outstanding sum attracting a higher interest rate of 9% per annum until the date of full realization. This verdict underscores the power of consumer forums in protecting citizens from unfair trade practices and holding businesses accountable for their service lapses.
