A service provider cannot unilaterally withhold customer funds or cancel orders based on unproven allegations of historical fraud, especially when previous returns were accepted and verified, as such conduct constitutes a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

ORDER

(As Per Sri N.Narayan Reddy, Member, on behalf of the Bench)

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.19/2026

1. This complaint is filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying to direct the opposite party:-

A. Allow the present complaint and hold that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and illegal recovery of money under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

B. To refund a sum of Rs.2,130.06/- to the Complainant being the amount illegally withheld after cancellation of the order.

C. To pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the Complainant towards mental agony, humiliation, emotional distress, harassment, inconvenience and hardship caused due to the wrongful acts of the Opposite Party.

D. To pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the above amounts from the date of cancellation of the order till the date of realization.

E. Award litigation costs of Rs.25,000/- in favour of the Complainant for the expenses incurred in pursuing this complaint

And

F. Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Commission may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and consumer welfare.

2. The case of the complainant in brief runs as follows:- The Complainant is a resident of Nabinagar, Nadigadda, Nandyal. The Opposite Party is FirstCry.com, represented by its Chief Executive Officer, Pune.

The Complainant placed an order on FirstCry.com on 01.12.2024 for a children’s tricycle and paid an amount of Rs.2,130.06/-. The payment was successfully debited. However, on the very next day, the Opposite Party cancelled the said order without assigning any reason or issuing any prior notice. Despite such cancellation, the amount paid by the Complainant was not refunded.

Upon contacting customer care, the Complainant was informed that the said amount had been adjusted against a previous order placed in the year 2023, alleging that a wrong product had been returned in that transaction. The Complainant denied the said allegation and asserted that the earlier return had been duly accepted after pickup and warehouse quality verification, in accordance with the Opposite Party’s own policy. At no point of time was any email, call, or written communication issued to the Complainant alleging a wrong return in respect of the earlier transaction.

In spite of the above, the Opposite Party unilaterally and illegally recovered the amount of Rs.2,130.06/- by cancelling the fresh order. No proof whatsoever has been furnished to substantiate the allegation of wrong return. Further, even in its reply before the National Consumer Helpline, the Opposite Party admitted that refunds in respect of the earlier order had already been processed, but subsequently took a contradictory stand by alleging a wrong return and adjusting the amount from the new order. Till date, the Complainant has neither received the ordered tricycle nor the refund, thereby suffering financial loss and mental distress.

By cancelling a valid order, withholding the refund amount, and arbitrarily branding the Complainant as a “fraud” in its internal system without issuing any notice, conducting any inquiry, or providing any supporting material, the Opposite Party has acted in a wholly unjust, arbitrary, and unlawful manner. Such conduct amounts to defamation, deficiency in service, and an unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking refund of the amount, compensation, and other appropriate reliefs for the wrongful acts committed by the Opposite Party.

The acts of the Opposite Party constitute deficiency in service on the following grounds: The acts of the Opposite