Failure To Replace Defective Spectacles Within Warranty, Bangalore District Commission Holds Lenskart Liable

Brief Facts:

The Complainants placed an order with Lenskart for a pair of bifocal glasses. The Complainants paid a total of Rs. 3299/-, including a premium of Rs. 299/- for insurance. At the time of purchase, Lenskart advised the Complainants to pay an additional amount to avail of a one-year warranty period, which would cover the replacement of the glasses or free service if any damage occurred within that time.

After ten days, the Complainants informed Lenskart that they were experiencing discomfort while wearing the glasses. Lenskart requested a 30-day period to adjust the glasses according to the Complainants' eyes. After repeated adjustments, the Complainants continued to experience issues as the frame began to loosen. Later, part of the frame broke which made the glasses unusable. This prevented the Complainants from using the phone or performing other tasks. Subsequently, the Complainants personally visited the Lenskart store and requested a repair or replacement of the glasses. Lenskart suggested paying Rs. 1,500/- for repairs but refused to replace the glasses or offer a refund, despite the additional amount paid at the time of purchase for the warranty.

Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant filed a consumer complaint before the Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Bangalore (“District Commission”). Lenskart didn't appear before the District Commission for proceedings. Therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte.

Observations of the District Commission:

The District Commission noted that the Complainants were unable to use the spectacles and requested a repair or replacement from Lenskart. However, Lenskart confirmed that it couldn't repair the spectacles, even when the warranty period was ongoing. Therefore, the District Commission held that Lenskart provided defective goods, failed to honour the warranty and caused considerable distress to the Complainants.

The District Commission further held that Lenskart's failure to replace the defective spectacles, despite the warranty, violated the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and caused undue mental anguish to the elderly Complainants. It held that Lenskart's conduct demonstrated unethical business practices, especially since it is well-known across India. Therefore, it held Lenskart liable for deficiency in service.

Consequently, the District Commission directed Lenskart to provide a replacement spectacle within 45 days or refund the amount of Rs. 3,299/- along with 8% annual interest from 19.11.2023 until payment is made. Further, Lenskart was directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 3,000/- along with Rs. 2,000/- for litigation costs to the Complainants.

Case Title: Kemath Anthony vs M/s Lenskart and Anr.

Case Number: 269/2024