Ranga Reddy: Amazon, Cambium asked to pay Rs 34,383 to IT manager for selling faulty vacuum cleaner

Hyderabad: District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ranga Reddy has directed Amazon India Pvt. Limited and Cambium Retail Pvt. Limited to refund Rs 24,383 with 9 percent interest to the IT manager.

It also directed to pay a compensation of Rs 5,000 for causing mental agony hardship and financial loss, and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs to the complainant.

Case details

Geetha Ardahyula, a resident of Kismatpur in Gandipet mandal of Ranga Reddy district, purchased a 360 S9 ultrasonic Lidar Robot vacuum cleaner and mop laser navigation 2200PA, E-Tank, Selective Room Cleaning Schedule, Multi-Floor Mapping No-Go Zone Self-Charge, and Resume Work with Alexa from Amazon India Pvt. Ltd website. It was sold by Cambium Retail Pvt. Ltd for an amount of Rs 24,383 under Amazon order.

The vacuum cleaner was delivered on September 8, 2022, to Geetha’s residence and installed by the office agent. The vacuum cleaner did not work from the day of its delivery and was not even able to recharge. Immediately, the complainant contacted the opposite party's customer care, but there was no response. In December 2022, the complainant raised a complaint through the mail with Amazon India Pvt. Ltd but they did not give any response till now.

Even after several requests, the Amazon India Pvt. Ltd refused to acknowledge the complaint and did not give a proper response to Geetha and kept postponing the matter on one or the other pretext. As Cambium Retail Pvt. Ltd is the seller of the robot vacuum, both the opposite parties are equally liable towards the consumer and their actions indicate that they are wantedly avoiding taking responsibility regarding the issues faced by the complainant.

With no option left, Geetha knocked on the doors of the Consumer Forum for justice. Despite serving notices to opposite parties, Amazon India Pvt. Ltd and Cambium Retail Pvt. Ltd neither presented nor filed any written replies. After going through the evidence submitted by Geetha, the Court opined that both the manufacturer and the dealer have a legal obligation to assist and facilitate the repair work of the subject product particularly considering the significant amount collected from the consumer.

The Court also pointed out that dealers must provide adequate after-sales service and support for the products they sell especially when substantial amounts are involved. Therefore, if a product sold by a dealer exhibits manufacturing defects, the dealer can be held liable along with the manufacturer for providing appropriate remedies and compensation to the aggrieved consumer.

The Court ruled in favor of Geetha and said that the opposite parties inadequate service caused a deficiency, negligence, and failure to meet the complainant’s expectations that resulted in her mental agony, hardship, and financial loss. Hence the complainant is entitled to a refund of the cost of the product Rs 24,383 with 9 percent interest, compensation of Rs 5,000, and another Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs to her.