4 min readNew DelhiJul 9, 2026 09:00 AM IST
A consumer commission in Srinagar has held an online shopping platform, Snapmint, liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice after a customer who ordered a Pigeon induction cooktop received a broken induction cooktop of a different brand and model. The commission directed the platform to replace the product or refund the purchase amount of Rs 1,819 and pay Rs 22, 000 as compensation to the complainant.
President Dr Farah Deeba and Shabnam Munshi (member) found that the company failed to resolve the grievance despite repeated complaints and assurances, while hearing the complaint filed by one Hamid Gulzar, who ordered the induction of the Pigeon company in 2023.
“The opposite party (Snapmint) is held liable not only for being deficient in service but also for adopting unfair trade practices. It is also acknowledged that due to such acts of the OP, the complainant has suffered mental pain, agony, harassment and financial loss,” the July 6 order read.
A broken shopping experience
The complainant claimed that he had ordered a Pigeon induction cooktop from Snapmint and was required to pay a total of Rs 1,918, including an EMI of Rs 516. However, upon opening the package, he allegedly found that the product was broken and was neither the brand nor the model that he had ordered.
The complainant then informed Snapmint and sought a replacement of the product. The company allegedly asked him to submit an unboxing video, which he did, and assured him that the issue would be resolved within a few days. However, no action was taken.
The complainant claimed that after a period of one month, he received a call from the agent of the said company, who asked for EMI, with whom the complainant again raised his grievance.
However, the complainant was allegedly again given hollow assurances by the agent of the said company. It was alleged that Snapmint was deficient in service and had indulged in unfair trade practices, and due to such acts, the civil score of the complainant had dropped.
Story continues below this ad
The complainant maintained that the said company had subjected him to immense pain, agony, harassment and financial loss, hence, this complaint. Advocate Ishfaq Wani represented the complainant in the matter.
‘Commission found non-functional product’
After examining the said induction in the open court, the commission found it nonfunctional and not the same brand as ordered by the complainant. The consumer body also noted that Snapmint did not choose to appear, nor did it choose to file a written version to support its case in this matter.
The commission directed Snapmint to replace the defective induction with a new one of the same company and model which the complainant had ordered, or refund the amount paid by the complainant. Snapmint was also ordered to pay Rs 20,000 as compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment, along with Rs 2,000 as litigation charges to the complainant.
Significance of ruling
The ruling highlights that online shopping platforms can be held accountable if they fail to deliver the product that was promised to consumers. It underscores that companies cannot simply offer assurances while leaving customer grievances unresolved and may face liability for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices if they deliver defective or incorrect products and fail to provide timely redressal.
Story continues below this ad
For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Jammu and Kashmir Consumer Commission Helpline: 1800 180 7114) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.
