Ordered Rs 22,000 fridge online, got ‘no product or refund’, man wins Rs 32,000

A Chhattisgarh consumer commission directed Amazon to refund Rs 22,090 with interest and pay compensation to a man after failing to deliver a refrigerator or refund the debited amount.

online fridge order amazon refund consumer news refrigeratorRelying on transaction records, the bank admitted that the payment was debited from the complainant's account and it was successfully transferred to Amazon. (AI-generated image)

A consumer forum in Chhattisgarh has held an e-commerce giant liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for allegedly failing to deliver a refrigerator or refund its amount after accepting a payment of Rs 22,090.

A bench of president Dakeshwar Prasad Sharma and members Nirupma Pradhan and Anil Agnihotri of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Raipur directed the e-tailer to refund the payment with 6 per cent interest, besides paying Rs 5,000 each towards mental agony and litigation costs.

“It is clear that the complainant, through IDBI Bank, had made the payment…for the purchase of the refrigerator, and the payment had been successfully received by Amazon. However, even after receiving the payment, Amazon neither delivered the refrigerator to the complainant nor refunded the amount received,” the commission said on July 21.

In view of its findings, the commission held the company guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and said the complainant was entitled to recover the said amount from the firm, along with interest.

The complainant purchased an LG 255-litre, three-star frost-free fridge from the e-commerce platform on June 13, 2017, for Rs 22,090, after making the payment online through his IDBI Bank account. Shortly after, the e-commerce company informed him that the payment for the fridge was not received, cancelled the order, and assured him that the amount, if deducted, would be refunded within two to three days.

However, according to the complainant, when he contacted IDBI Bank, he was informed that the payment had been successfully transferred to the e-commerce platform. Yet the e-commerce platform neither delivered the fridge nor refunded the amount despite repeated requests.

The man stated that despite repeated emails and representations, he neither received the fridge nor a refund. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, he approached the district consumer commission seeking a refund, compensation, and litigation costs.

Story continues below this ad

Amazon did not file any written statement, affidavit, or documentary evidence before the commission to contest the complaint or substantiate its claim that it had not received the payment.

Bank denies service deficiency

The bank admitted that Rs 22,090 was debited from the complainant’s account for the fridge on June 13, 2017, and said the amount had been successfully transferred online to the e-tailer. It relied on the complainant’s bank statement and transaction records to contend that the payment had been successfully processed.

The bank argued that it had only acted as the payment intermediary and had rendered proper services. “If the amount of Rs 22,090 transferred by the complainant…was not received by the e-commerce platform, the amount would be immediately re-credited to the complainant’s bank account,” the bank said, and stated that it had not committed any deficiency in service of any kind.

‘Amazon fails to prove non-receipt’

The commission noted that the e-tailer had failed to file any written statement, affidavit or evidence to prove its assertion that it had not received the complainant’s payment for the fridge, adding that the burden of proving non-receipt of the payment lay on the company.

Story continues below this ad

It observed that the complainant produced his bank statement showing that Rs 22,090 had been debited from his account, while IDBI Bank produced records confirming that the payment had been successfully settled with the company.

The commission accepted IDBI Bank’s evidence that the payment for the fridge had been successfully transferred to the company and held that the bank had merely facilitated the transaction. Since there was no evidence of any deficiency in the bank’s services, it could not be held liable.

The commission directed the e-commerce platform to refund Rs 22,090 with 6 per cent annual interest from the complaint’s filing until payment, besides paying Rs 5,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs within 45 days.

Takeaway

This ruling underscores that e-commerce platforms cannot evade liability by merely claiming non-receipt of payment without supporting evidence. It also clarifies that banks acting as payment intermediaries will not be held liable where transaction records establish successful fund transfer, reinforcing accountability for online sellers in digital payment disputes.

Story continues below this ad

Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Chhattisgarh: 1800-233-3663) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Don’t miss out on these stories:

‘Refused refund’ for cancelled Bangkok trip, couple wins Rs 60,000 from travel company

Telangana bakery sells ‘expired’ Diet Coke to customer, ordered to pay Rs 25,000

Late by ‘317 minutes’ in reaching destination, man wins Rs 60,000 from Railways

Jagriti Rai works with The Indian Express (Digital), where she writes from the vital intersection of law, gender, and society. Working on a dedicated legal desk, she focuses on translating complex legal frameworks into relatable narratives, exploring how the judiciary and legislative shifts empower and shape the consciousness of citizens in their daily lives. Expertise Socio-Legal Specialization: Jagriti brings a critical, human-centric perspective to modern social debates. Her work focuses on how legal developments impact gender rights, marginalized communities, and individual liberties. Diverse Editorial Background: With over 4 years of experience in digital and mainstream media, she has developed a versatile reporting style. Her previous tenures at high-traffic platforms like The Lallantop and Dainik Bhaskar provided her with deep insights into the information needs of a diverse Indian audience. Academic Foundations: Post-Graduate in Journalism from the Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC), India’s premier media training institute. Master of Arts in Ancient History from Banaras Hindu University (BHU), providing her with the historical and cultural context necessary to analyze long-standing social structures and legal evolutions. ... Read More

 

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Advertisement
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments