- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Holds Manufacturer, Online Seller Liable for Defective Soundbar
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Holds Manufacturer, Online Seller Liable for Defective Soundbar
The Dharamshala (Himachal Pradesh) bench of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by Hemanshu Mishra (President) along with Arti Sood and Narayan Thakur (Members), held Consulting Rooms Private Limited (Online Seller) and Harman International Private Limited (Manufacturer) jointly and severally liable for selling a defective JBL Bluetooth Soundbar and Subwoofer. The Commission ordered them to refund the purchase price, pay compensation, and cover litigation costs.
Rabinder Kumar, the complainant, purchased a JBL Bluetooth Soundbar with a subwoofer from Harman International Pvt. Ltd. (Manufacturer) through the online seller Consulting Rooms Private Limited on Instakart Services (Shopping Platform), a Flipkart subsidiary. After purchase, the subwoofer stopped connecting with the soundbar. Kumar contacted the Manufacturer for a solution, but they cited lockdown restrictions as a reason for their inaction. Feeling aggrieved, Kumar filed a consumer complaint in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra, Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh (District Commission).
The complainant requested the District Commission to direct the Manufacturer and the Online Seller to replace the defective soundbar and subwoofer, pay ₹2,00,000 in compensation, reimburse ₹25,000 for legal proceedings, and award interest.
The Manufacturer failed to appear at the hearing and was consequently held ex parte. The Online Seller contested the complaint, arguing that they were a mere facilitator between buyers and manufacturers on an e-commerce platform. They denied direct liability for the quality of the product.
The District Commission found that the product purchased by the complainant was under warranty for one year. The complainant had repeatedly reported the defect, but the Manufacturer and Online Seller failed to rectify it, resulting in the subwoofer being unable to connect to the soundbar. The District Commission held the Manufacturer and Online Seller jointly and severally liable for refunding the purchase price, paying compensation, and covering legal fees.
The District Commission ordered the Manufacturer and Online Seller to jointly and severally refund the purchase price of ₹8,999 to the complainant, with interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of the complaint until payment. They were also ordered to pay the complainant ₹4,000 in compensation and cover legal fees of ₹5,000. The Manufacturer was permitted to retrieve the product from the complainant's premises in its current condition after making all necessary payments.