Consumer Forum penalises Flipkart for delivery of different brand’s product as replacement

A Consumer Court in Bengaluru recently ordered Flipkart Internet Private Limited to refund an amount of about ₹13,799 to a customer for delivering a different product as a replacement of the item originally ordered by him..The Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission also asked the e-commerce platform to pay an amount of ₹10,000 as compensation and litigation costs to 80-year-old Purnachandra Thoudam for the mental agony caused to him.The Commission President Vijaykumar P Pawale and Members V Anuradha and Renukadevi Deshpande rejected Flipkart’s contention that it was merely an intermediary between the customer and seller.“We are of the considered view that it cannot [be] contended by the OP No. 1 that simply it is intermediary and so OP No.1 is not at all liable for any deficiency of services caused to the complainant,” the Consumer Court said..Thoudam had ordered a treadmill from Flipkart in June 2023. However, after the technician who came to assemble and install it found certain defects in the product, it was returned. While the seller initially refused the request for return, Flipkart later agreed to replace the product. The replacement was delivered the next month but this time no technician was sent despite assurance by Flipkart. When the complainant himself tried to install the treadmill, he found the product delivered as a replacement was of a different company and sold by a different seller. The 80-year-old then filed a complaint with the Consumer Court. It was alleged that Flipkart and the sellers all along had the intention to defraud and cheat the octogenarian by selling defective goods..In response, Flipkart argued that it cannot be held liable as it was merely a marketplace and an intermediary. It also cited the website’s terms and conditions to contend that the contract of sale was between the buyer and the seller only.The Consumer Forum found sufficient documentary evidence to prove that Flipkart had failed to arrange the delivery of the product ordered by the complainant.Hence, it ruled in favour of the complainant and ordered the e-commerce company to refund the amount and also compensate the customer. Advocate Rakesh SN represented the complainant.Advocate B Pramod represented Flipkart.