5K For Rs.187 Ice Cream? Swiggy To Pay Customer After It Failed to Deliver Dessert; Here Is What Happened

A Consumer Court in Bengaluru ordered Swiggy to pay Rs 3,000 as compensation and Rs 2,000 as litigation costs to a customer for not delivering an ice cream ordered through the app.

Swiggy might not have realised that non-delivery of Rs. 187 ice cream would cost them a fine of Rs. 5000. A Bengaluru consumer court ordered the food delivery app, to compensate a customer for failing to deliver an ice cream ordered by her. The customer had ordered a ‘nutty death by chocolate ice cream’ worth Rs. 187, as per the report by Bar and Bench.

The incident happened in January 2023 when a customer had ordered an ‘Nutty Death by Chocolate ice cream’ from the food delivery app. 

Story Behind Undelivered Ice Cream By Swiggy

According to the complaint of a customer, a delivery agent picked up the order from the ice cream shop, but did not deliver it to her, however the status on the app showed it as ‘delivered.’

Later on the consumer raised the matter with Swiggy, but the food delivery app did not provide a refund for the order, so then she approached the Bengaluru Consumer Court.

What Swiggy Claimed About Undelivered Ice Cream?

The company claimed that it was unable to verify wthether the order was delivered or not as it was marked as ‘delivered’ on the app. It further stated that it was the mistake of the delivery agent and they were just an intermediary between the customer and the restaurants and hence should not be held liable. 

Court Asks Swiggy To Pay 5K To Customer

The court rejected Swiggy’s claims and stated that it was protected from liability under the provisions of the Information Technology Act.

A Consumer Court in Bengaluru ordered Swiggy to pay Rs 3,000 as compensation and Rs 2,000 as litigation costs to a customer for not delivering an ice cream ordered through the app. Bengaluru also directed Swiggy to refund the amount of the ice cream, Rs 187, to the customer, as reported by Bar and Bench.

“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 commission noted, “The said acts of the OP [Swiggy] amounts to deficiency of service and also unfair trade practice”.

The complainant had initially demanded Rs. 10,000 as compensation and Rs. 7,500 for legal expenses. However, the court called this amount excessive and ordered Swiggy to pay Rs. 5,000 instead.