The commission passed the directive in response to a plea filed by a customer whose order for an iPhone was allegedly cancelled by the platform
The commission noted that Flipkart had cancelled the order (and hiked prices later on) intentionally to make extra profit, which amounted to restrictive trade practices
The commission ruled that the petitioner allegedly suffered “mental harassment” after his online order was "unilaterally cancelled" by the platform
A Mumbai consumer disputes redressal commission has reportedly found Flipkart
guilty of adopting unfair trade practices and ordered the e-commerce major to pay a customer INR 10,000 for the “mental harassment” he suffered after it cancelled an iPhone order.
The tribunal conceded that the petitioner allegedly suffered “mental harassment” after his online order was “unilaterally cancelled” by the platform despite the complainant being in constant touch with the company.
As per news agency PTI, the complainant ordered an iPhone from Flipkart on July 10, 2022 and paid INR 39,628 using his credit card. The phone was supposed to be delivered on July 12 but, as per the petitioner, the ecommerce platform abruptly cancelled the order six days later.
As per the complaint, Flipkart informed the petitioner that several attempts to deliver the product failed as he was unavailable, leading to the eventual cancellation. The cancellation has not only caused loss, and mental harassment but also subjected him to online fraud, the complaint reportedly said.
In response, Flipkart informed the commission that the complainant had mistaken the platform as the seller of the product. The ecommerce major added that it merely operated as an intermediary while the actual products were sold and supplied by independent third-party sellers.
Claiming that it had no play in the transaction between the petitioner and the seller (International Value Retail Private Limited), Flipkart went on to claim that the order was cancelled on account of the unresponsive customer and that the dispute only existed between the complainant and the seller.
However, the consumer court threw out Flipkart’s contention and observed that the complainant was asked to place a fresh order, adding that the price of the same iPhone had increased by INR 7,000 by then.
The commission noted that Flipkart had done this intentionally to make extra profit, which amounted to a deficiency in service and employment of unfair and restrictive trade practices.
“Though the complainant has received the refund, he needs to be compensated for the mental harassment and agony suffered by him due to the unilateral cancellation of his order by Flipkart,” added the consumer court.
In an order that was passed last month, the commission directed Flipkart to pay INR 10,000 towards compensation for the mental harassment and agony suffered by the complainant and INR 3,000 towards the cost.
