A Consumer Commission has ordered e-commerce major Flipkart and a retailer to pay Rs 25,000 for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and causing mental agony and physical harassment to a consumer who was delivered a bar of detergent soap and small keypad phone instead of the iPhone he had ordered.
This payment will be apart from the refund of Rs 48,999 that the consumer Harsha S, a student from the district headquarters town of Koppal in Karnataka, had paid for the iPhone.
Harsha approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Koppal, against Flipkart Internet Private Limited and Sane Retails complaining that he was sent a small keypad phone and a 'Nirma' soap instead of an Apple iPhone he had ordered online.
He alleged in his complaint, which dates back to 2021, that he had paid Rs 48,999 and demanded refund and also compensation for deficiency of service and mental agony he underwent.
The complainant said he was shocked after opening the parcel that he received as it contained a small keypad phone and one detergent soap of 140 grams instead of the booked Apple iPhone 11 (Green 65GB).
The Commission said in its order last week: It is worthwhile to mention here that, now-a-days online shopping is spreading everywhere, because it is time and money saving, but the responsibilities of the companies cannot be over after selling of the product, as it is the bounden duty of the companies to satisfy their customers, because it does not give any liberty to usurp the money of the consumers either by sending wrong items/product to cheat the customers and to gulp the money of customers.
It held Flipkart and its retailer responsible for deficiency of service, and said their act and conduct fall under unfair trade practice as they sold or sent the wrong item than the purchased item even after charging full amount of the product.
The Commission, comprising the President A G Maldar, Woman Member G E Sowbhagyalakshmi and Member G S Patil, ordered that Flipkart and Sane Retails are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs10,000 towards deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and Rs 15,000 for mental agony, physical harassment and cost of litigation.
They were also ordered to refund the cost of the phone, Rs 48,999, all within eight weeks.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)