Summary of this article
Telangana consumer commission found Zepto sold a grocery product Rs 34 above MRP.
Zepto was ordered to pay Rs 7,000 compensation and litigation costs to complainant.
Companies must deposit Rs 50,000, stop unfair pricing practices within 45 days.
A Consumer Commission in Telangana has directed Zepto to pay and deposit a total of Rs 57,000 after finding that the quick-commerce platform sold a grocery product above its maximum retail price (MRP) and offered a discount on the inflated price. The Commission also directed the company to discontinue the unfair trade practice and not repeat it.
What Happened In The Case
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Ranga Reddy, passed the order on October 13, 2026, in a complaint filed by K. Shiva Ganesh, a 35-year-old advocate from Uppal, Hyderabad. According to the order, Shiva Ganesh placed an order for tender jackfruit and MTR 3 Min Poha from Zepto on September 28, 2023. The total bill was Rs 293, which includes Rs 288 for the products and Rs 5 in handling charges.
The complainant said that a product carrying an MRP of Rs 150 was listed at Rs 214 before discount and sold to him for Rs 184 after discount. He was therefore charged Rs 34 above the printed MRP. He argued that selling products above MRP while offering discounts on inflated prices amounted to an unfair trade practice. He sought Rs 5 lakh in compensation and Rs 50,000 towards litigation expenses.
Zepto said it was engaged in retailing goods manufactured by other companies and did not manufacture the products itself. It referred to Clause 5.1 of its terms of use, which stated that product prices could be affected by technical or human errors and that customers could report such discrepancies for correction.
The company submitted that it corrected the displayed MRP after the complainant brought the issue to its attention. It also said it had offered to refund the entire amount paid for the concerned product as a goodwill gesture, rather than refunding only the difference between the MRP and the amount charged. According to Zepto, the complainant refused the offer and demanded an additional Rs 5,000. The company denied misleading the customer and sought dismissal of the complaint.
What Did The Consumer Commission Observe
The Commission found that Zepto had sold the product above its maximum retail price (MRP) and offered a discount on the inflated price. It rejected the company’s defence that the discrepancy was an unintended technical or typographical error, holding that the possibility of pricing errors did not justify the practice.
The order stated, “And, in consequence of the same, the lame excuse that was taken by the opposite parties that the prices of the product may be modified from time to time and there can be an unintended error with respect to prices and other information of the products is not tenable.”
The Commission held that the pricing practice lacked transparency and undermined consumers' trust in the prices displayed on the platform. It also expressed concern about the effect of such pricing practices on consumers and the time required to pursue legal remedies.
The order stated, “In the said facts and circumstances of the case, we are in complete agreement with the version of the complainant that selling of more than the MRP for essential groceries misleads the consumers.”
What Did The Commission Order
The Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed Geddit Convenience Private Limited and Geddit Conveyance, the two opposite parties named in the case, to comply jointly and severally with its directions.
It ordered the companies to pay Rs 2,000 as compensation to the complainant and Rs 5,000 towards his litigation costs. It also directed them to deposit Rs 50,000 in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the Ranga Reddy District Consumer Commission. The Commission further directed the companies to discontinue the unfair or restrictive trade practice and not repeat it under Section 39(1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The companies were given 45 days from the date of receipt of the order to comply.
