Man Gets Wrong Product From Flipkart: Kerala High Court Directs Police To Redress His Grievance Within One Month

The Kerala High Court recently directed the concerned District Police Chief to expeditiously resolve the grievance of a petitioner who had received a wrong laptop, delivered to him by Flipkart. 

Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A disposed of the petition with a direction to the Kottayam Police Chief to take up the petitioner's complaint and redress the matter within a period of one month. 

The petitioner had placed an order for a laptop with the specification of Acer Aspire 7 Core i5 for around Rs.54,000 through the online platform www.flipkart.com, which is an e-commerce entity operated by Flipkart Internet Pvt Ltd. The laptop was being sold by a seller namely Tech-Connect Retail Pvt Ltd.

However, the product he received was a laptop from a company called I-LIFE Digital that costs only Rs. 35,000.

Further, the petitioner noticed that as per the tax invoice furnished to him by Flipkart, the laptop that was sent to him was Acer Aspire, the one he had originally ordered. Nevertheless, the serial number given on the tax invoice was that of the cheaper laptop he had received. Therefore, it was alleged that Tech-Connect Retail had deliberately sent the wrong product with the intention to defraud the petitioner. 

It was also submitted that when the petitioner brought his grievance to Flipkart's notice, its Managing Director had informed him that an FIR would be lodged against Tech-Connect Retail. On this premise, the Managing Director had also taken his consent to file the FIR, but no step or action was taken in furtherance of the same. 

Accordingly, contending that Tech-Connect Retail had swindled Rs. 54,000 from the petitioner for a laptop that costs only Rs. 35,000, the petitioner submitted a complaint to the police. 

In his complaint, it was also alleged that Flipkart had imported the concerned laptop and therefore, Flipkart had conspired with Tech-Connect Retail to defraud him. The petitioner said his hunch of Flipkart being involved in this act was affirmed by the tax receipt sent to him which stated that the laptop delivered to him was an Acer Aspire. 

Hence, the petitioner argued that Flipkart and Tech-Connect Retail had committed offences punishable under Sections 415, 417(cheating), 420 (dishonestly inducing delivery of property) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC. 

However, since the police officials did not take any action on his complaint, the petitioner approached the High Court. 

Advocates Arun Mathew Vadakkan and Don Paul appeared for the petitioner and pointed out that in connection with the same, highlighting his grievance, he had submitted a complaint before the District Police Chief since the Station House Officer failed to conduct proper action in his complaint.

Therefore, seeking consideration of the said complaint by the District Police Chief, the petitioner moved the High Court. 

Public Prosecutor Sudheer Gopalakrishnan appeared in the matter.

Taking into consideration all the relevant inputs, the Court took the view that the petition can be disposed of by directing the Police Chief to take up the petitioner's complaint and issue proper direction to the officers concerned to redress his grievance as expeditiously as possible. An appropriate decision in this regard was directed to be taken within a period of one month.

Case Title: Aby Thomas v. Director General of Police & Ors. 

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 359

Click Here To Read/Download The Order