The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Central Mumbai) has held e-commerce platform Refiff.com guilty of deficiency in service for failing to refund a customer who was sent the wrong product.

However, the Commission declined to award compensation for mental harassment, noting that the complainant himself had acted abusively towards the company's staff.

In an order passed on June 9, the Commission directed Refiff.com to refund ₹16,124 along with interest and pay ₹3,000 towards litigation costs. The customer had ordered a 5-gram gold coin on January 25, 2018, but received a ring instead. A return request was filed the same day, and the incorrect item was picked up and returned to the company on February 21, 2018.

Despite acknowledging the issue and collecting the product, Refiff.com failed to process the refund even after the complainant submitted his bank details. With no resolution in sight, the complainant escalated the matter to the CEO, sent a legal notice, and eventually filed a consumer complaint seeking the refund, ₹50,000 for mental harassment, and ₹20,000 as litigation costs.

The company argued that the complaint was barred by the doctrine of Res Judicata, citing a prior case filed by the complainant in Goa that was dismissed. It also claimed to be a mere intermediary between buyer and seller and denied any deficiency in service.

The Commission rejected these arguments, noting that the Goa case was dismissed for non-appearance and not on merit. It further held that Refiff.com had directly dealt with the customer’s grievance, confirmed the purchase, and arranged for the return — actions inconsistent with its claim of being a mere intermediary.

“The website cannot claim immunity from deficiency in service,” the Commission said, concluding that it had indeed failed in its duty by taking back the wrong product but not issuing the refund.

However, the Commission came down heavily on the complainant for sending abusive, derogatory, and threatening emails to the company’s staff, including female employees. It stated that such conduct was “not justified under any circumstances” and that the complainant had “equally harassed and traumatised” the company’s representatives.

As a result, the Commission declined to grant the ₹50,000 sought for mental harassment.

Refiff.com has been directed to comply with the order within 60 days.