Bengaluru court orders Swiggy to pay customer Rs 5,000 for failing to deliver ice-cream worth Rs 187

According to the complaint, a delivery agent picked up the order from the ice cream shop, but it was not delivered to her, although the status on the app showed it as 'delivered'. (Representational images: Unsplash)

A Bengaluru consumer court has ordered Swiggy to pay Rs 5,000 to a customer after it failed to deliver an ice-cream after accepting the order. The complainant had placed an order for a "nutty death by chocolate ice-cream' worth Rs 187, Bar and Bench reported.

Of the Rs 5,000, the court ordered Rs 3,000 to be paid as compensation to the customer and Rs 2,000 towards his legal expenses. It also observed that there was a "deficiency of service" and "unfair trade practice" on Swiggy's part.

The customer had reportedly approached the Consumer Commission after Swiggy failed to deliver the ice cream she ordered in January 2023.

According to the complaint, a delivery agent picked up the order from the ice cream shop, but it was not delivered to her, although the status on the app showed it as "delivered". When she approached Swiggy's customer care, she was not issued a refund hence she moved the consumer court.

Meanwhile, Swiggy claimed that it was just an intermediary between the customer and the restaurants and could not be held responsible for the alleged mistake of its delivery agent. It also stated that it was protected from liability under the provisions of the Information Technology Act and that the company had been unable to verify if the order was delivered when it was marked as delivered on the app, Bar and Bench reported.

The court, however, rejected these claims. "We are of the considered view that the complainant has proved that there is a deficiency of service on the part of the OP [Opposite party/Swiggy) since OP has not refunded the amount paid by the complainant though the ordered product has not been delivered to the complainant,” the Bangalore Urban II Additional District Consumer Redressal Commission said. “The said acts of the OP [Swiggy] amounts to deficiency of service and also unfair trade practice”.

The complainant claimed Rs 10,000 as compensation and Rs 7,500 as litigation expenses, but the court found it to be exorbitant and ordered Swiggy to pay up Rs 5,000 instead.