Bangalore District Commission: Lenskart Held Liable For Failing To Replace Defective Spectacles Under Warranty
Pranav B Prem
The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore, comprising Vijaykumar M. Pavale (President), V. Anuradha (Member), and Renukadevi Deshpande (Member), has held 'Lenskart' liable for deficiency in service for supplying defective bifocal spectacles and for failing to comply with the terms of the warranty extended at the time of purchase.
Factual Background
The Complainants had purchased a pair of bifocal spectacles from Lenskart, paying a sum of Rs. 20,329.99/-, which included an additional payment of Rs. 299/- for insurance coverage. Upon purchase, the Complainants were advised by Lenskart to pay an extra premium to avail a one-year warranty, which assured replacement or free service in the event of any damage within the stipulated period.
Within ten days of receiving the spectacles, the Complainants reported discomfort while using them. Lenskart requested a 30-day period to make necessary adjustments to suit the Complainants' vision requirements. Despite multiple adjustment efforts, the spectacles remained defective. Subsequently, the frame of the spectacles became loose and eventually broke, rendering them unusable for essential activities, including operating a mobile phone.
Following the damage, the Complainants approached the Lenskart store and requested repair or replacement under the warranty. However, Lenskart declined to replace the spectacles and instead demanded Rs. 1,500/- for repair services. Despite having paid an additional premium for warranty coverage, Lenskart refused to offer a replacement or refund. Aggrieved by this, the Complainants instituted a consumer complaint before the District Commission. Lenskart failed to appear during the proceedings and was therefore proceeded against ex-parte.
Findings of the District Commission
The District Commission found that the Complainants had indeed been unable to use the spectacles due to the defects and had sought a remedy well within the warranty period. It was observed that despite acknowledging its inability to repair the spectacles, Lenskart failed to honour the replacement warranty extended at the time of sale.
The Commission held that Lenskart’s failure to either repair or replace the defective product constituted deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It further observed that such conduct, particularly from a reputed entity with a nationwide presence, amounted to unethical business practice, causing significant mental distress to the elderly Complainants.
Relief Granted
Accordingly, the District Commission directed Lenskart to either replace the defective spectacles within 45 days or refund a sum of Rs. 3,299/- to the Complainants, along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 19.11.2023 until realization. Additionally, Lenskart was ordered to pay compensation of Rs. 3,000/- for the mental agony suffered and Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation costs.
Cause Title: Kemath Anthony V. M/s Lenskart and Anr.
Case No: 269/2024
Coram: Shri. Vijaykumar M. Pavale [President], Smt. V. Anuradha [Member], Smt. Renukadevi Deshpande [Member]
[Read/Download order]
