The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chandigarh recently imposed a penalty of ₹4,000 on Myntra for delivering ladies' sandals instead of men's shoes [Avnish Mittal v Myntra Designs Pvt Ltd]..A Coram of Commission President Pawanjit Singh and member Suresh Kumar Sardana also directed Myntra to issue full refund to the customer.The order was passed based on the evidence produced which showed that Myntra had sent an altogether different product instead of men's shoes which was ordered by the customer.."Especially when the evidence led by complainant is unrebutted by OP, hence, the aforesaid act of OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part. Hence, the instant consumer complaint deserves to be allowed," the order dated March 5 stated..The Commission was hearing a complaint by one Avnish Mittal alleging that after he ordered shoes worth ₹7,611, Myntra delivered a pair of ladies' sandals instead.Despite seeking help from customer support, the issue went unresolved. Aggrieved, Mittal approached the Commission..Myntra stated that it was only an intermediary and that the product was sold by an independent seller. The company, therefore, opposed the application for not impleading the seller. Further, it admitted that the product was ordered from its platform but denied that the wrong product was delivered..The Commission noted that the complainant had attached a copy of the invoice, a screenshot of the order confirmation page, and a photograph of the consignment showing the name of the addressee as that of another person in Aurangabad. Based on this and the fact that the evidence was not rebutted by Myntra, the Court concluded that Myntra's service was deficient.In response to Myntra's claim that it was only an intermediary, the Court said that when the tax invoice clearly indicated that the product was being sold through Myntra, it could not escape from its liability..Accordingly, the Commission directed Myntra to refund ₹7,611 to the complainant along with 9% interest per annum from the date of purchase.Additionally, it directed Myntra to pay ₹2,000 as compensation to the complainant along with ₹2,000 to cover litigation costs..The complainant was represented by advocate Sukhwinder Singh.Myntra was represented by Advocate Gaurav Bhardwaj..[Read Order]
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chandigarh recently imposed a penalty of ₹4,000 on Myntra for delivering ladies' sandals instead of men's shoes [Avnish Mittal v Myntra Designs Pvt Ltd]..A Coram of Commission President Pawanjit Singh and member Suresh Kumar Sardana also directed Myntra to issue full refund to the customer.The order was passed based on the evidence produced which showed that Myntra had sent an altogether different product instead of men's shoes which was ordered by the customer.."Especially when the evidence led by complainant is unrebutted by OP, hence, the aforesaid act of OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part. Hence, the instant consumer complaint deserves to be allowed," the order dated March 5 stated..The Commission was hearing a complaint by one Avnish Mittal alleging that after he ordered shoes worth ₹7,611, Myntra delivered a pair of ladies' sandals instead.Despite seeking help from customer support, the issue went unresolved. Aggrieved, Mittal approached the Commission..Myntra stated that it was only an intermediary and that the product was sold by an independent seller. The company, therefore, opposed the application for not impleading the seller. Further, it admitted that the product was ordered from its platform but denied that the wrong product was delivered..The Commission noted that the complainant had attached a copy of the invoice, a screenshot of the order confirmation page, and a photograph of the consignment showing the name of the addressee as that of another person in Aurangabad. Based on this and the fact that the evidence was not rebutted by Myntra, the Court concluded that Myntra's service was deficient.In response to Myntra's claim that it was only an intermediary, the Court said that when the tax invoice clearly indicated that the product was being sold through Myntra, it could not escape from its liability..Accordingly, the Commission directed Myntra to refund ₹7,611 to the complainant along with 9% interest per annum from the date of purchase.Additionally, it directed Myntra to pay ₹2,000 as compensation to the complainant along with ₹2,000 to cover litigation costs..The complainant was represented by advocate Sukhwinder Singh.Myntra was represented by Advocate Gaurav Bhardwaj..[Read Order]