Bengaluru consumer court has ruled against Swiggy
Court ordered Swiggy to pay compensation of Rs 5000 to customer
Compensation for failing to deliver an ice cream order
A Bengaluru consumer court has ruled against popular food delivery aggregator Swiggy, ordering the company to compensate a customer with ₹5,000 after failing to deliver an ice cream order, as reported by Bar and Bench.
The incident dates back to January 2023 when a customer placed an order for ‘Nutty Death by Chocolate’ from Cream Stone via Swiggy. Despite the app indicating the order as ‘delivered,’ the ice cream never reached the customer. Upon contacting Swiggy for a refund, the customer faced further disappointment as the company allegedly failed to initiate the reimbursement process.
Swiggy defended itself by citing its role as a mere intermediary between customers and third-party restaurants, claiming protection under the Information Technology Act. However, the consumer court bench, led by President Vijaykumar M Pawale, with members V Anuradha and Renukadevj Deshpande, deemed Swiggy’s conduct as an ‘unfair trade practice.’
The bench held Swiggy accountable for deficient service and ordered compensation of ₹3,000, rejecting the customer’s initial demand for ₹10,000 as excessive. Additionally, Swiggy was asked to pay litigation costs of ₹2,000 and refund the original order amount of ₹187.
The court’s decision underscores the importance of upholding consumer rights and holding service providers accountable for their actions.
Bengaluru consumer court has ruled against Swiggy
Court ordered Swiggy to pay compensation of Rs 5000 to customer
Compensation for failing to deliver an ice cream order
A Bengaluru consumer court has ruled against popular food delivery aggregator Swiggy, ordering the company to compensate a customer with ₹5,000 after failing to deliver an ice cream order, as reported by Bar and Bench.
The incident dates back to January 2023 when a customer placed an order for ‘Nutty Death by Chocolate’ from Cream Stone via Swiggy. Despite the app indicating the order as ‘delivered,’ the ice cream never reached the customer. Upon contacting Swiggy for a refund, the customer faced further disappointment as the company allegedly failed to initiate the reimbursement process.
Swiggy defended itself by citing its role as a mere intermediary between customers and third-party restaurants, claiming protection under the Information Technology Act. However, the consumer court bench, led by President Vijaykumar M Pawale, with members V Anuradha and Renukadevj Deshpande, deemed Swiggy’s conduct as an ‘unfair trade practice.’
The bench held Swiggy accountable for deficient service and ordered compensation of ₹3,000, rejecting the customer’s initial demand for ₹10,000 as excessive. Additionally, Swiggy was asked to pay litigation costs of ₹2,000 and refund the original order amount of ₹187.
The court’s decision underscores the importance of upholding consumer rights and holding service providers accountable for their actions.
LIVE TV