NEW DELHI: A consumer commission in Haridwar has directed an online footwear retailer to refund Rs 3,606 to a customer for two defective pairs of shoes, along with Rs 15,000 in compensation and litigation costs, after holding that the company’s refusal to refund the money amounted to a deficiency in service.What was the issueThe complainant, Kamal Singh, had bought two pairs of Red Chief shoes online in June 2025 — one for himself worth Rs 1,499 and another for his son worth Rs 2,107, totalling Rs 3,606. Both pairs, according to the complaint, had size and quality problems. Red Chief accepted the return of both pairs on 21 June 2025, but instead of refunding the money, it issued a credit note valid for three months and refused to return the amount, citing its internal company policy.The customer argued that despite repeatedly emailing Red Chief asking for his money back, the company refused. Aggrieved by this, the complainant approached the consumer commission seeking a refund along with compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.Red Chief, in its defence, said that the shoes were not defective. It further contended that the complainant had not clearly explained why the shoes were returned, and pointed out that a credit note had already been issued and used by the complainant to purchase another product, so there was no deficiency in service on its part.What the commission saidThe bench, comprising president Gagan Kumar Gupta and members Dr Amresh Rawat and Ranjana Goyal, examined the evidence, including emails and a tracking report showing that the credit note had been issued to the complainant — within days of the shoes being purchased — confirming that the company itself had acknowledged the size and quality defects in the shoes.“If the credit note has been used by the complainants, then the bill of the product purchased with the said credit note by the opposite party, or the transaction ID, or order confirmation, or any system record proving that the credit note was used by the complainants, ought to have been produced,” the commission observed.The bench then added that Red Chief had not submitted any such evidence in the case. The commission said the burden of proving this fact was on the company, but it had failed to do so, and found the customer’s claim that he never used the credit note to be credible.The commission concluded that despite the complainant returning the defective shoes, the company’s refusal to refund the amount amounted to a deficiency in service. “On the part of the opposite party, despite the complainants returning the shoes in question, refusing to refund the payment has caused a deficiency in its service,” the bench held.The commission ordered Red Chief to refund Rs 3,606 within 45 days, along with 6 per cent simple interest per annum from the date the complaint was filed until final payment. It also directed the company to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs — taking the total payout to Rs 18,606.The order added that if Red Chief fails to comply within the stipulated period, it will have to pay the entire amount at a higher rate of 8 per cent interest per annum instead.
