BUSINESS

Paytm Alleges Certain Customers Cheated It Out Of ₹6.15 Lakhs, CBI Investigates

It is rare for the agency to take up such cases unless they have been referred by the central government or there are directions by the Supreme Court or a high court.

16/12/2016 4:09 PM IST | Updated 16/12/2016 4:24 PM IST
Shailesh Andrade / Reuters
Advertisement boards of Paytm, a digital wallet company, are seen placed at stalls of roadside vegetable vendors as they wait for customers in Mumbai, India, November 19, 2016. Picture taken November 19, 2016. REUTERS/Shailesh Andrade

CBI has registered an FIR against some customers of digital wallet PayTm on the company's complaint that it has allegedly been cheated to the tune of Rs 6.15 lakh by customers based in Delhi.

It is rare for the agency to take up such cases unless they have been referred by the central government or there are directions by the Supreme Court or a high court.

CBI has registered FIR against 15 customers who are residents of Kalkaji, Govindpuri and Saket besides unknown officials of One97 Communications--parent company of Paytm.

The complaint from the Manager Legal, M Sivakumar, claimed that the company makes payment for defective products received by a customer and also arranges a reverse pickup of the damaged product which is sent to the merchant.

The process is done by a team of customer care executives who have been assigned specific IDs and passwords to handle such complaints from the customers and arrange refund and pickup.

It is alleged that the company found that in 48 cases customers had received refunds even though the delivery of orders was made successfully to them.

"As a matter of facts wherein delivery of orders were successful and satisfactory to the customer, refund should not happen. However, in all these 48 cases refund of order amount happened to the respective customers to the tune of Rs 6.15 lakh," the complaint, which is now part of the FIR, alleged.

It alleged that customers "illegally" appropriated money refunded in their bank accounts and wallets.

It claimed that the acts reflects "serious" fraudulent act and foul play with common intention to wrongfully gain along with such involved customers. .

More On This Topic