The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (East), Delhi allowed the complaint for deficiency of service in delivering an obsolete laptop instead of the ordered HP Pavilion and subsequent loss of the returned item in transit. It held both Amazon and its platform seller jointly and severally liable for refund, compensation, and litigation costs.
The complainant, Harjas Singh Sodhi, filed the case after ordering an HP Pavilion laptop from Amazon but receiving an old IBM ThinkPad instead. Following Amazon’s pick-up and a promise of a refund, the company denied liability after claiming the returned product was not the original and was “lost in transit.” The complaint sought a full refund with interest, disclosure of the delivery rider’s details, and compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.
The seller, Appario Retail, denied all responsibility, arguing lack of privity of contract and no direct payment from the buyer.
The Bench comprising Mr. Sukhvir Singh Malhotra (President) and Mr. Ravi Kumar (Member) highlighted the importance of robust systems and recommended that e-commerce companies should ensure delivery personnel witness product opening to avoid such disputes. It found both Amazon and Appario Retail jointly liable based on evidence of contractual arrangement via the sales invoice and handling chain.
The Commission observed that once a picked-up item is lost in transit, the onus for refund falls on the companies, not the consumer. All defenses based on policy violations or excessive refunds were termed vague, lacking evidence, and unsubstantiated.
In result, both Amazon and Appario were ordered to refund Rs. 61,990 with 9% interest from the date of order. They were directed to further pay Rs. 10,000 for mental agony/harassment and Rs. 7,500 for litigation costs. All amounts must be paid within 30 days of the judgment, failing which interest rises to 11% per annum until realization.
Appearances:
For the Complainant: Ms. Anushkaa Arora, Advocate