Rs 31 Refund Dispute Ends In Rs 8,000 Compensation For Mumbai Woman Against Grofers

Groceries are a crucial part of our everyday lives, and consumers nowadays place their whole trust in online grocery services. However, Grofers, a renowned online grocery distributor, recently faced penalties. Here's what happened.

Who was the woman granted the compensation?

Canva

After being ordered to reimburse a Mumbai woman, Kalpana Shah, with Rs 8,000. The argument arose when, among other things, a Rs 31 payment for undelivered watermelon seeds in 2020 was not returned.

Unfortunately, it was later revealed that Shah was a victim of cyber fraud, and she lost Rs 5,000 after submitting an OTP while seeking to obtain a refund. In 2022, she turned to the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for help. The panel found in her favour and ordered Grofers to repay the money.

Why was the woman denied compensation by grofers?

Canva

According to the Times of India, the woman sought the commission in 2022 and explained her situation. Following the failed delivery on January 28, 2020, Shah attempted many solutions. Despite her attempts, the customer care personnel reacted by claiming that all things had been successfully delivered according to their records.

They later closed her case, leaving Shah disappointed with their resolution. This occurrence prompted Shah to seek higher authority regarding her unresolved delivery order.

Kalpana Shah contacted an individual representing Grofers, whom she discovered via an online search engine, after seeing the company's response. The alleged corporate representative called her and offered her two options: "she could either get a refund immediately or wait a fortnight to receive the product." Shah, who chose the refund, sadly lost Rs 5,000 in the process.

Meanwhile, the Commission stated, "In the said case, we are of the opinion that the opposite party has rendered deficiency in service by showing their harsh approach towards the complainant."

How did the fiasco end?

As a result, it will be preferable to order the opposing party to pay Rs 5,000 in compensation for mental anguish and Rs 3,000 in litigation costs. In the case of the alleged siphoning of funds from complainants' accounts, she must follow up with the relevant investigation authorities for further remedies. The complaint's request for restitution of funds taken from the opposite party's bank account is consequently denied."

The panel stated that Kalpana Shah should receive a Rs 31 refund plus 9% interest beginning in January 2020. According to the ruling of the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Grofers, referred to as the "opposite party," failed to satisfy the expected service standards and engaged in unfair trade practices against the complaint.

What do you think about this? Tell us in the comments.

For more trending stories, follow us on Telegram.