For undelivered and not refunded food orders worth Rs 362, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kollam (District Commission/Commission) recently ordered the online food delivery app Zomato and the restaurant owner to jointly pay compensation of Rs 8,362 to a law student.
The commission awarded Rs 5,000 as compensation for the customer’s mental agony and Rs 3,000 was ordered as the cost of proceedings.
The commission further ordered that Zomato and the restaurant owner shall comply with the directions within 45 days from the date of the order, failing which the student/complainant will be entitled to recover the amount with interest at the rate of 12% except for costs from opposite parties.
President EM Muhammed Ibrahim, members S Sandhya Rani and Stanly Harold found that the customer was entitled to a refund of Rs 362 with interest and compensation for mental agony.
The complainant, namely Arun G Krishnan, a final-year law student at the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, had filed a case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
In 2019, the student placed two orders from a restaurant through Zomato. But the company neither delivered the food item to him nor refunded the amount paid against the order, even though the student demanded the same by making multiple communications to the representative of Zomato on the same day and later.
Before the commission, the student alleged that he had experienced similar instances with the company earlier also when he was staying in New Delhi.
He apprised the court that for the non-delivery of the product, Zomato gave him the reason that they could not deliver the food due to an issue with the address of the student as he was unavailable to collect the food at the mentioned address.
He alleged that as Zomato could not add delivery charges to his orders, they cancelled by giving him false contradictory explanations. He contended that Zomato’s act would amount to a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
Moreover, he claimed that the manager of the restaurant had admitted to him over the telephone that he was aware of such unfair, restrictive, fraudulent trade practices of Zomato India Pvt Ltd and other food delivery service providers and that they do these kinds of illegal things in times of heavy rush, rain, etc.
Though the notice was served to all opposite parties, none of them appeared before the commission. Consequently, last month the commission passed its order ex-parte, without their presence.
Read all the Latest India News here
Comments
0 comment