Consumer Court penalizes Flipkart for swapping brands on Replacement Orders
According to a Bar & Bench report, Flipkart Internet Pvt. has been ordered by the Consumer Court in Bengaluru to issue a refund of approximately 
13,799 to a customer after delivering a different product as a replacement for the item that was ordered originally.
13,799 to a customer after delivering a different product as a replacement for the item that was ordered originally.
The Bangalore Metropolitan II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has likewise instructed the e-commerce business monster to repay 80-year-old Purnachandra Thoudam with 10, 000 for the psychological trouble caused, alongside suit costs, it added.
10, 000 for the psychological trouble caused, alongside suit costs, it added.
As per the report, Flipkart’s claim that it acted solely as an intermediary between the customer and the seller was rejected by the Commission, which was led by President Vijaykumar P Pawale and consisted of Members V Anuradha and Renukadevi Deshpande.
The report further says Bar & Bench report, Thoudam, the customer, ordered a treadmill from Flipkart in June 2023. The technician who came to assemble and install the treadmill discovered a few flaws, so the customer had to return the product.
Flipkart later agreed to replace the product and delivered it the following month, despite the seller’s initial refusal to accept the return. However, despite assurances from Flipkart, no technician was dispatched this time, according to the report.
According to the report, the complainant himself attempted to install the treadmill and 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, claiming that Flipkart and the sellers had always intended to deceive and cheat the elderly man by selling defective goods.
The response from Flipkart was that it could not be held accountable because it was only a marketplace and an intermediary. It additionally referred to the site’s agreements to fight that the agreement of offer was between the purchaser and the dealer just, the report added.
