Selling a defective iPhone during Flipkart’s ‘Big Billion Days’ sale has cost Apple India and the e-commerce platform, after the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ordered them to refund the handset price and compensate a Jalandhar buyer.
Holding Apple India, Flipkart and a Haryana-based seller guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the commission directed them to jointly refund ₹54,846 to complainant Gagandeep (33), a resident of Sodal Nagar. They were also ordered to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for mental harassment and ₹10,000 towards litigation expenses within 45 days.
Gagandeep had purchased an Apple iPhone 14 through Flipkart during the ‘Big Billion Days’ sale in October 2023. The handset, priced at Rs 54,499, was bought under an exchange offer.
According to the complaint, the phone box did not carry Apple’s original tamper-proof seal when it was delivered. Instead, it bore only Flipkart’s seal. The package was opened in the presence of the delivery executive and the entire process was recorded on video.
From the day one, the phone’s battery drained abnormally within a few hours. Gagandeep reported the issue to Flipkart within the replacement period and sought a replacement. Instead, he was directed to Apple’s authorised service centre where, he alleged, neither was the handset replaced, nor was any job sheet issued after inspection.
Apple defended itself by claiming that diagnostic tests found no hardware defect and that the complainant had been advised to update the software. Flipkart argued that it merely acted as an intermediary between the buyer and seller and, therefore, could not be held responsible for the alleged defect.
Rejecting both arguments, the commission observed that Apple failed to produce any records to support its claim that the device was functioning normally. It also noted that no job sheet was issued despite the complainant approaching the authorised service centre within days of purchase.
The commission further held that Flipkart could not escape liability by describing itself as an intermediary. Since the transaction, payment and consumer interaction took place through its platform, it remained accountable under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020. It also found that Flipkart had failed to demonstrate compliance with its obligation to ensure that product descriptions and quality matched what was delivered.
Observing that the consumer had raised complaints immediately after receiving the handset and consistently pursued the matter, the commission concluded that the companies had failed to provide effective redressal, making them jointly liable to refund the purchase amount and compensate the complainant.
