Mumbai: In a relief for online shoppers, the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission recently ordered Amazon India to pay a total of Rs 40,000 to a customer for a defective television bought for Rs 16,500, dismissing the e-commerce giant’s long-standing argument that it is merely a “middleman” with no responsibility for product quality. “An online marketplace like Amazon cannot absolve itself of responsibility merely by describing itself as an intermediary, especially when it actively facilitates the sale, receives commercial benefit, and engages directly with consumers post-sale,” the commission said. The commission said it was found guilty of not providing a resolution to the complainant’s grievance. “It has only made email correspondence with hollow assurances,” the commission said.The commission also noted that once the product was sold through their online platform, it is assumed that they own responsibility for ensuring that the product was free from defects and serviceable. “The principle of vicarious liability squarely applies, as the online platform service provider stands in a position of trust and derives commercial benefit from the sale,” the commission said.The commission said that a consumer purchasing goods online does not have direct access to manufacturer or service centre. “The only visible and accessible entity is the online platform. The consumer relies not only on the brand but also on the credibility and assurance of platform,” the commission said. It further observed that having voluntarily chosen to host, promote, and facilitate the sale of product, the platform assumes a fiduciary and statutory duty to ensure that consumer receives defect-free goods and effective post-sale support. “The repeated standardised email responses without meaningful resolution amount to a deficiency in service. The failure to either replace or refund the defective product, despite full knowledge of the defect, attracts liability under the Consumer Protection Act…,” the commission said. The total amount to be paid included the refund, along with interest, compensation for mental agony and legal expenses. The complaint was filed by Goregaon based T R Dhariwal in 2021. Dhariwal submitted that he purchased a Dektron 40-inch Full HD LED TV through the Amazon platform for Rs 16,499. Upon delivery, Dhariwal discovered the unit suffered from poor sound and picture quality, and the remote control was entirely non-functional. Despite months of emails and phone calls, and initial promises of a replacement, Amazon eventually told Dhariwal to contact the manufacturer directly and closed the case without a resolution. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, Dhariwal approached the commission seeking a refund, compensation, and litigation costs.Amazon, legally appearing as Amazon Seller Services Private Limited, argued before the commission that it operates strictly as an “intermediary e-commerce marketplace.” It was further contended that the contract of sale exists solely between the buyer and the third-party seller, and that under its “Conditions of Use,” the platform provides only technical support rather than product warranties.
