Delhi consumer commission rejects Flipkart's intermediary liability defense
A Delhi consumer court has ordered Flipkart to compensate a buyer who received soap instead of a smartphone, rejecting the company's claim to intermediary safe harbor protection.
The Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ruled against Flipkart in a case involving a delivery discrepancy, stating the platform cannot evade liability for service deficiencies by claiming intermediary status. The dispute arose after a customer ordered a Realme smartphone but received bars of soap, a grievance that remained unresolved for years through internal channels.
Flipkart had argued that it functions solely as a marketplace platform, protected by the safe harbor provisions of India’s Information Technology Act. However, the commission ruled that the company's role in facilitating logistics and payment processing creates an inherent obligation to address consumer complaints, regardless of the contractual terms between the platform and third-party vendors.
The ruling directs Flipkart to refund the original purchase price with interest, alongside compensation for litigation costs and mental harassment. This decision follows other recent regulatory challenges for the company regarding consumer protection, signaling a shift in how courts approach the responsibility of large-scale e-commerce intermediaries.