- Home
- /
- Consumer Cases
- /
- Chandigarh Commission Holds Amazon...
Chandigarh Commission Holds Amazon Liable For Delivering Defective Telescope And Awards ₹ 10K As Compensation.
Smita Singh
6 Aug 2023 9:30 AM GMT
In a recent development, the bench of Chandigarh's District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, which consisted of Pawanjit Singh (President), Surjeet Kaur (Member), and Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member), issued a directive to Amazon Seller Services Pvt Ltd. The directive entailed a refund of Rs 4,999/-, accompanied by an interest rate of 9 per cent per annum, to a city resident....
In a recent development, the bench of Chandigarh's District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, which consisted of Pawanjit Singh (President), Surjeet Kaur (Member), and Suresh Kumar Sardana (Member), issued a directive to Amazon Seller Services Pvt Ltd. The directive entailed a refund of Rs 4,999/-, accompanied by an interest rate of 9 per cent per annum, to a city resident. This action was taken due to the sale of a defective telescope. Additionally, Amazon was instructed to provide a compensation of Rs 2,500 for causing mental distress and harassment to the customer, coupled with Rs 2,500 to cover litigation costs. The Commission attributed its decision to Amazon's accountability for the subpar product quality, its inability to furnish a satisfactory solution, and its involvement in unfair trade practices.
Brief Facts:
Mr. Lakshay Kundu (“Complainant”) purchased a Telescope from Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. (“Amazon”), and paid Rs. 4,499/- for the product. The telescope was delivered on 07.07.2021 by Amazon’s delivery agent. Upon opening the parcel, the Complainant found the telescope to be technically defective and not functioning properly. The Complainant immediately requested a replacement through Amazon mobile application, and the replacement order was accepted. Subsequently, the defective telescope was collected by an assigned return agent. A second telescope was delivered as a replacement on 15.07.2021, but it also had physical defects and did not work properly. The complainant again requested a replacement or a refund through Amazon mobile application on the same day. Despite multiple requests, Amazon did not provide a satisfactory resolution and kept delaying the matter.
As a result, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, Chandigarh (“District Commission”) by asserting that both telescopes delivered by Amazon were defective and did not work properly. The Complainant contacted Amazon's customer care, sent a legal notice, and requested either a replacement or a refund of Rs. 4,499, but to no avail. On the other hand, Amazon contended that it is an online platform and not the actual seller of the product. It stated that the responsibility for the alleged defects lies with the independent third-party seller. Amazon further claimed that it does not provide after-sales service for products listed on its e-commerce platform and therefore cannot be held liable for the defects.
Observations of the Commission:
Considering the presented facts and arguments, the District Commission found that the Complainant's assertions regarding the substandard quality and defects in the delivered telescopes remained unchallenged. The District Commission further determined that Amazon’s participation in the transaction, coupled with its failure to ensure the delivery of a defect-free product and furnish a timely resolution, constituted a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
The District Commission further recognized the mental distress and inconvenience suffered by the Complainant due to the protracted and unsatisfactory resolution process. As a result, the District Commission deemed it fitting to grant compensation to the complainant. In this regard, Amazon was ordered to refund Rs. 4999/- along with Rs. 2500/- as costs of litigation. Further, Amazon was ordered to pay Rs. 2,500/- to the Complainant as compensation for the mental agony and harassment endured. This compensation was deemed as a recognition of the Complainant's emotional and psychological distress resulting from the defective products, the subsequent replacement requests, and the lack of timely and effective resolution.
Case: Lakshay Kundu vs Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: CC/686/2021
Advocate for the Complainant: Mohit Kumar
Advocate for the Respondent: Sh.Atul Goyal
