A Consumer Court in Bengaluru recently ordered Flipkart Internet Private Limited to refund approximately ₹13,799 to a customer for delivering a different product as a replacement for the item originally ordered.
The Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission also instructed the e-commerce platform to pay ₹10,000 as compensation and litigation costs to 80-year-old Purnachandra Thoudam for the mental anguish caused.
The Commission’s President Vijaykumar P Pawale, along with Members V Anuradha and Renukadevi Deshpande, rejected Flipkart’s claim that it was merely an intermediary between the customer and the seller.
“We are of the considered view that it cannot be contended by OP No. 1 that simply it is an intermediary and so OP No.1 is not at all liable for any deficiency of services caused to the complainant,” the Consumer Court stated.
Thoudam had ordered a treadmill from Flipkart in June 2023. After a technician found defects in the product during assembly and installation, it was returned. Although the seller initially refused to accept the return, Flipkart later agreed to replace the product. However, no technician was sent to install the replacement despite assurances from Flipkart.
When Thoudam tried to install the treadmill himself, he discovered that the replacement product was from a different company and sold by a different seller.
The 80-year-old then filed a complaint with the Consumer Court, alleging that Flipkart and the sellers intended to defraud him by selling defective goods.
Flipkart argued that it could not be held liable as it was merely a marketplace and intermediary, citing the website’s terms and conditions to assert that the contract of sale was solely between the buyer and the seller.
The Consumer Forum found sufficient documentary evidence proving that Flipkart had failed to deliver the product ordered by the complainant. Consequently, it ruled in favor of the complainant, ordering the e-commerce company to refund the amount and compensate the customer.
Advocate Rakesh SN represented the complainant, while Advocate B Pramod represented Flipkart.
