0

The District Commission failed to notice facts that prove deficiency in service, thus its order is contrary to facts and law: Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

The District Commission’s ruling in favor of the Opposition Party was held to be incorrect by the State Commission as it failed to consider all facts on record that clearly showed that the Opposite Party had provided a deficient service to the Complainant. This was observed in the matter of Sri. Lakshminarayan v. Glober Cyber Security Response, [Appeal No. 583/2021] before the Hon’ble President Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Judicial Member, Mr. K.B. Sangannanavar.

An appeal under section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The facts of the case involve the complainant raising a consumer complaint against the Respondent for deficiency in service by not securing his laptop from hackers and seeking compensation of Rs. 35,000 and Rs. 1 Lakh as damages. The Commission then proceeded with the examination of the submitted documents. The Complainant had approached Truth Labs to run tests to ascertain the status of his devices, as he was not a technical expert.

The Certificate and Report from Truth Labs confirmed that his device, email and social media account were indeed hacked. Furthermore, his mobile phone was also being remotely monitored, unknown devices were connected to his Wi-Fi network. However, such intrusion was not found in his laptop.  It is this report that was overlooked by the District Commission. Throughout the proceedings the Respondent been absent and orders have been passed exparte, which made it difficult for the Commission to arrive at a reasonable conclusion.

Thus, the State Commission was of the view that, “the Complainant is entitled for refund of the amount. However, he could not be said entitled for Rs.1 lakh towards damages as claimed. Accordingly, we proceed to allow the appeal filed U/s.41 of CPA 2019. Consequently, set aside the impugned order dtd.30.06.2021 passed in CC.No.1004/2020 by 1st Addl., District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru Urban District and the Complaint filed by the Complainant is allowed in part and directed the OP to refund Rs.35,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of receipt till realization and to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the amount so awarded shall carry interest at 9% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization.”

Click Here to Read the Judgement

Judgement reviewed by Vagisha Sagar

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat