Nidheesh Babu - Complainant(s)


Myntra Design Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

10 Nov 2022


C.D.R.C. Kasaragod
Complaint Case No. CC/182/2021
( Date of Filing : 23 Oct 2021 )
1. Nidheesh Babu
S/o P Babu, Nirmalyam, Nellithara, P O Anadasramam 671531
1. Myntra Design Pvt Ltd
Buildings Alyssa, Begonia and clover situated in Embassy Tech Village, Outer Ring road, Devarabeesanahalli Village, Varthur Hobli 560103
 HON'BLE MR. RadhaKrishnan Nair M MEMBER
Dated : 10 Nov 2022
Final Order / Judgement






Dated this, the 10th day of November 2022


SRI.KRISHNAN.K                         :PRESIDENT


SMT.BEENA.K.G                            : MEMBER


Nidheesh Babu

S/o. P. Babu


Nellithara, P.O Anadhasramam                            :  Complainant

Pin - 671531




Myntra Design Pvt. Ltd

Buildings Alyssa

Begonia and dover situated in

Embassy Tech Village                                            : Opposite Party

Outer Ring Road,

Devarabeesanahalli Village,

Varthur Hobli, Bangalaru – 560103

(Adv: Naveen Shankar)





The brief facts in the complaint of Sri. Nidheesh babu is that he placed order with Opposite party for 37 articles in two different numbers and paid the stated amount of Rs. 1289/-  and Rs. 549/- through online transactions.  But out of the total 37 articles three were missing.  The complainant informed this fact to the Opposite party and they agreed to refund the price of articles and received return back of articles.  The Opposite party failed to comply the promise and refund the amount in time but closed the complaint.  The complainant placed this order during covid lockdown period wherein the shops were closed.  The family members of the complainant were in urgent need of ordered articles.  At the time of placing this order the complainant was working at Gurvananm Covid hospital.  Due to the missing of articles the complainant was constrained to call Opposite party during work time and the ordered articles were some under garments of ladies who were his family members.  The complainant was constrained to explain the details of the order infront of lady patients this made severe mental agony to the complainant.  Moreover due to missing of the parcel items the complainant family members of complaint undergone severe mental agony as the shops were closed during that time due to covid lockdown.  Hence the complainant prays for a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with Rs. 2000/- as cost of the proceedings from Opposite party.

The Opposite party filed version stating that they are in co-operated under the provisions of the company’s Act 1956.  Which is an e commerce platform with its registered office at Bangalore.  The Opposite party further states that the complainant has not produced any concrete evident in support of his allegations which clearly shows malafide intention of the complainant.  The Opposite party denies all the averments and allegations in the complaint except to the extent expressly admitted here in.  The Opposite party admitted that the complainant had ordered 37 articles and paid the stated amount of Rs. 1289/- and 549/- through on line transactions.  The complainant received only 34 articles and made complaint to the Opposite party that 3 pieces are missing.  The Opposite party approved the claim and proceeded to refund for all 37 articles instead of the three missing ones on 11th September.  Due to some technical issue some part of the refund is not directed back to the source.  But is added in the waullet of the user on the website.  The Opposite party has left nostorn and in delivering customer satisfaction.  The Opposite party Myntra Designing Pvt Ltd is a company engaged in others in providing trading /selling over internet through their website www.myntra .com  and mobile application .  The Opposite party provides an online market place e commerce entity has defined under CP Act 2019 and consumer protection rules 2020. For any act of the seller the market place e commerce platform or its operating entity cannot be held liable.  The Opposite party neither offers nor provides any assurance or offers warranty to the buyers of the product.  The Opposite party further stated that they fall under the definition of an intermediary under section 21/w of the information technology act.  The refund has already been processed and the complainant has filed the present matter by conceiving the facts of the actual case in order to extract illegal compensation from Opposite party.  Hence the complaint may be dismissed with exemplary costs to the Opposite party.

The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the documents produced are marked as Ext A1 to A4 marked Opposite party No:1not adducing evidence, instead filed memo stating relinquishment the vakalth. 

The main question raised for consideration are:-

  1. Whether there is deficiency in service or negligence on the part of Opposite party?
  2. Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation?
  3. If so what is the relief?

    For convenience question No 1 to 3 can be discussed together.

    Perusing documents Ext A1 series is the flipkart axis bank credit card statement.  Ext A2 is the complaint informed to Opposite Party through g mail, Ext A3 series is the ordered item. Ext A4 is the reply letter from Opposite Party  to the complainant.  The complainant placed order for 37 articles (ladies under garments during corona lockdown  period with Opposite Party ) out of the 37 articles 3 were missing at the time of delivery.  In Ext A4 Opposite Party was apologizing to the complainant for the latches on their part and seeking time till 6th September to credit the amount to the complainants account. There after also one more communication sent by Myntra to the complainant assuring that within 7 to 10 working days the refund will be credited to the complainants account. But Opposite party failed to do so.  The   Opposite Party has not produced any documents to prove that the aforesaid amount is refunded to the complainants account.  In the absence of rebuttal evidence we holds that the complainants allegation is true, that the Opposite Party failed to refund the price of the cancelled order to the complainant.  Due to the negligence on the part of Opposite Party complainant suffered mental agony and loss.  The complainant loss as to be compensated.  The complaint is entitled to get a total amount of Rs. 10,000/- compensation and cost.

            Therefore the complaint is allowed directing Opposite Party to pay a compensation  of Rs. 10,000/- along with cost of Rs. 2000/-.

            The time for compliance is 30 days from the receipt of the copy of this judgment.

     Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                           Sd/-

MEMBER                                          MEMBER                              PRESIDENT


A1- Series – The flipkart axis bank credit card statement

A2- The complaint informed to OP through G mail

A3- Ordered item

A4- Reply letter


                   Sd/-                                                    Sd/-                                            Sd/-

MEMBER                                          MEMBER                              PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order


                                                                                    Assistant Registrar







[HON'BLE MRS. Beena.K.G.]
[HON'BLE MR. RadhaKrishnan Nair M]

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!


Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number


Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.