The Mohali Consumer Forum has instructed an E-commerce website, a third-party seller and a courier firm to pay Rs 1 lakh to a 36-year-old civil engineer from Mohali. He received 5 detergent cakes when he placed an order for an Apple iPhone 7 plus.
The customer named Parveen Kumar Sharma said that he purchased an Apple iPhone 7 plus from Snapdeal on March 4, 2017. He was notified that Snapdeal will deliver the product before March 12.
The delivery packet was sent through Blue Dart courier firm on March 6, 2017, at Parveen’s address. In his complaint, Sharma stated he gave the address of a guest accommodation provided to him by his company and the package was received by its caretaker, Netra, as he was not there at the time of delivery. When he opened the package, he found five detergent cakes of Rim bar instead of the iPhone.
Sharma claims that he contacted Snapdeal’s helpline and informed the company representatives. On March 13, 2 representatives of the courier firm took the packet from him for investigation and concluded that the courier boy was not at fault as the package was sealed at the time of delivery.
Further, the guy alleged that he sent 2 e-mails to Snapdeal, however, no action was taken. His account with Snapdeal was also deleted. So, Sharma filed a complaint at the Mohali Consumer Forum on June 19, 2017.
Snapdeal, in its reply at the forum, said that the website is an electronic platform which acts as an intermediary to facilitate sales transactions between independent third-party sellers and independent end consumers. Once a user accepts offer of sale of products made by the third party seller on the website, the seller is intimated electronically and is required to ensure that the products are made available and delivered in accordance to the delivery terms as set out by the seller as displayed on the website, they said.
”As per confirmation received from seller and logistic service provider, the iPhone was delivered intact to the complainant at the given address. The complainant has cooked up a story about receiving soap bars instead of the phone. It is claimed that ordered product was duly delivered to the complainant and that is why replacement request raised by the complainant was denied at seller’s end,” Snapdeal said in its reply.
Meanwhile, Blue Dart Courier did not anything in the matter. On Monday, after hearing all the arguments, held that Snapdeal’s plea states that it had no role in placement of order and dispatch of ordered product, and yet the firm disclosed that the product ordered by the complainant was shipped through their courier services.
Also Read: Snapdeal Founders Booked After A Complaint Of Businessman
“This means that OP Number 1 (Snapdeal), by taking advantage of cited provisions of Information Technology Act and clauses of Terms of Use, wants to wriggle out from liability,” read the forum order.
Article source: IndianExpress
