Mumbai Suburban District Commission Holds Hindustan Times Media Ltd. For Failure To Provide Access To Its Employment Portal Despite Receiving Payments

Brief Facts:

The Complainant went on an online platform called Firefly e-Ventures Ltd. (“Firefly”) and registered herself as a 'service provider'. Hindustan Times Media Ltd. (“HT Media”) operates Firefly for commission-based labour supply and employment services. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic during 2020-21, the online portal services were disrupted. On June 24, 2021, the Complainant made a payment of Rs. 55,475/- to HT Media through the portal's payment link. On June 26, 2021, the Complainant accepted the agreement received in her email. Subsequently, on June 28, 2021, the Complainant attended training via HT Media's Zoom meeting.

However, the Complainant noticed a lack of organized work by HT Media on its portal two days after the training. Despite repeated attempts to communicate via email, the issues remained unresolved. Due to technical errors, the Complainant could not conduct any business for a year, resulting in significant financial losses. Despite notifying HT Media several times, no improvements were made to the portal's service.

Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai Suburban (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against HT Media. HT Media didn't appear before the District Commission for the proceedings.

Observations by the District Commission:

The District Commission noted that despite completing online training, the Complainant's access to the portal was deactivated just two days later, which caused significant financial losses. It held that HT Media's indifferent and ineffective response led to the Complainant suffering substantial economic and mental harm.

It held that due to technical faults, the Complainant could not conduct any business for a year. Further, it held that if the portal had functioned properly, the Complainant could have earned an estimated annual income of Rs. 10,00,000/-. Therefore, the District Commission held HT Media liable for deficiency in services.

Consequently, the District Commission directed HT Media to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh for economic losses and Rs. 1 Lakh for mental distress to the Complainant. Further, it was directed to refund Rs. 55,475/- to the Complainant with 9% interest from the date of order. Lastly, it was also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- for litigation costs to the Complainant.