Anish D002 Amjad D012 Sreeraj D015 Sanket D020 Renjith D040 Venu D042 Vivek D045 Suraj D059

Need for the Act

Definition of Consumer

Complaint

Unfair Trade Practice

Restrictive Trade Practice

Consumer Protection Councils

Consumer Protection Redressal Agencies

Procedure to file/on admission of a complaint

Cases to understand practical situations where the Act was applicable

Flow of the presentation

Definition of Consumer

Any person who buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, and includes any person who uses such goods with the approval of the buyer. It does not include a person who buys goods for resale or for any commercial purpose

Right to Safety

Right to Information

Right to Choose

Right to be heard

Right to seek redressal against

exploitation

Right to consumer education

Rights under the ActProtection against marketing of goods and services that are hazardous to life and property

Right to be informed about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard, price of goods and services

Right to be assured, wherever possible, access to a variety of goods and services at competitive prices

Assured that consumers’ interests will receive due consideration at appropriate forums

Seek redressal against unfair or restrictive trade practices

Right to consumer education

Buying goods for consideration- in terms of money or other goods and services

User of goods with the approval of buyer-could be family members, friends and relatives

Should not be purchased for resale or commercial purpose Buying goods for self employment is a consumer

Features of Consumer of Goods

Hiring of services for consideration• Going to a Doctor• Hiring an advocate, customer of a bank• Tenant against a landlord

Beneficiary of service is also a consumer Hirer of services of a doctor and beneficiary both are

consumers

Service not to be availed for any commercial purpose

Features of Consumer of Services

Includes banking, transport, processing, boarding and lodging, entertainment

Does not Include services free of charge Does not include rendering of a service

under a “Contract of personal service” Render service in the private capacity – servant

entering into contract with a master

What does services include?

UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES

“Trade practices which a trader, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice”

Falsely represents that the goods/services are of particular standard, quality, quantity, grade, composition, style or model;

Falsely represents any rebuilt, second hand, renovated, or old goods as new goods

Represents that the goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance, characteristic, accessories, uses or benefits which such goods or services do not have

Represents that the seller or the supplier has sponsorship or approval or affiliation which such seller or supplier does not have

Make a false or misleading representation concerning the needs for , or the usefulness of, any goods or services

Gives to the public any warranty or guarantee of the performance or length of life of a product or of any goods that is not based on an adequate or proper test thereof

Materially misleading the public concerning the price at which a product or like products or goods or services, have been or are ordinarily sold or provided

Permits the publication of any advertisement which indicates that the good is sold at bargain price when the

good is not authorized to sell at bargain price

Permits the offering of gifts, prizes or other items with intention of not providing them as offered or creating an

impression that something is given or offered free of charge when it is fully or partly covered by the amount

charged in the transaction

Withholding from the participants any scheme offering gifts, prizes or other items free of charge

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

“A trade practice which tends to bring about manipulation of price, or its conditions of delivery or to affect flow of supplies in the market relating to goods or services in such a manner as to impose on the consumers unjustified costs or restrictions”

Delay Beyond the period agreed by a

trader results in increase in price

Any trade practice which requires

consumers to buy, hire or avail of any

goods or services so as to purchase

another goods or service

Complaint

Complaint is a formal allegation against a party

Who can file a complaint(i)  a consumer

(ii)  any voluntary consumer association registered under the Companies Act, 1956 or under any other law for the time being in force

(iii)  the Central Government or any State Government

(iv)  one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest

(v)  in case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative

Grounds on which complaint can be made

UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICEAdopting unfair methods to promote sale,

misleading public about price, goods or service, charging above MRP printed on product etc

Example – HPCL caseGoods which are hazardous to life and safety

when usedExample – Selling goods after their expiry date

Grounds on which complaint can be made DEFECTS

◦ Any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or under any contract express or implied or as is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods.

DEFICIENCY◦ Any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the

quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.

Time Limit for filing complaint◦ Within two years from the date on which the cause of action arises

◦ Even if the time limit expires, the complaint can be taken up provided complainant is able to satisfy the Forum or Commission about the reasonableness in the delay

◦  Example - Canara Bank vs Agnes D'Mello on 23.08.05 Mrs D’Mello deposited some jewellery with Canara bank. Bank lost

it. Bank kept giving her false sense of hope to retrieve the jewellery, and thus A was put in a state of inaction. Later on when filed a suit on the Bank, it claimed that the suit was not main tainable as the limitation time after the cause of action arose has lapsed. The Commission reprimanded the bank and admitted the case

District Forums State Commission

National Commission

Composition President- District judge

President- High Court judge

President- Supreme court judge

Terms of office

5 years or up to age of 65 years

5 years or up to age of 67 years

5 years or up to age of 70 years

Pecuniary Jurisdiction

Claims that do not exceed Rs.20 lakh

Claims between Rs. 20 lakh to Rs. 1 Cr

Claims over Rs. 1 Cr

Territorial Jurisdiction

Local limits of jurisdiction

Local limits of jurisdiction

Whole of Indiaexcept J&K

Appellate Jurisdiction

- Entertain appeals against district forums within 30 days

Entertain appeals against state commissions within 30 days

Revisional Jurisdiction

- Jurisdiction power over cases of district forums

Jurisdiction power over cases of State commissions

Sr. No. Value of goods or services and the compensation claimed

Amount of fee payable

1 Up to Rs. 1 Lakh 1002 Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 5

lakh200

3 Rs. 5 lakh to Rs. 10 lakh

400

4 Rs. 10 lakh to Rs. 20 lakh

500

Consumer Disputes Redressal Agencies

Consumer files a complaint in the forum

Lab test is required

Sends receipt of lab report

Asking for version of the case within 30 days

Admits or denies or fails to take any actionSends the copy of lab report

VERDICTIf opposite party admits:

Consumer forum decides the matter on the merits of the case

Procedure to be followed on Admission of a complaint

Consumer Forum

Laboratory

Opposite party

Consumer

VERDICTIf opposite party denies or fails to take actionConsumer forum shall issue an appropriate order as per section 14 after hearing the parties

Transfer of cases◦ On the application of the complainant , the state/national commision may , at

any stage of proceeding, transfer any complaint pending before the forum to another forum if the interest of the justice so requires

Circuit benches◦ State and national commission can function at different places from time to time

Power to set aside ex-parte order◦ Where an order is passed by national commssion ex-parte against the opposite

party or complaint , as the case may be, the aggrieved party may apply to commission to set aside the said order in interest of justice

Power to make regulations◦ National commission have the power to make regulations with the previous

approval of the central Government

Powers to Consumer forums

Appellate power of the state commission

Appellate power of the National Commission

Appeal to supreme court

Appeals against Orders of forums

COLGATE-PALMOLIVE VS ANCHOR HEALTH

2008

Respondent’s claim in the advertisement of being the ‘ONLY’ toothpaste containing all 3 ingredients viz: Calcium, Fluoride and triclosan

Respondent’s claim of being the ‘FIRST’ all round protection toothpaste

Respondent claiming that Fluoride in the toothpaste gives 30% more cavity protection

Triclosan is ten times more effective in reducing bacteria

COLGATE-PALMOLIVE VS ANCHOR HEALTHCase filed by Colgate for a permanent injunction refraining anchor from telecasting misleading advertisements

Plaintiffs objection :

The word ‘ONLY’ is intended to

mean that among its white

tooth paste range

The word ‘FIRST’ relates to the

use of slogan “All round Protection” for the first time

All 3 ingredients are not present

in Colgate’s Cibacca variant

Usage of optimum

quantity of fluoride protects

against tooth decay

Respondent’s Reply

How Commercial advertising is related to consumer protection

The advertisement gives the impression that anchor is the only toothpaste containing the three ingredients

Similarly the use of word ‘First’ is not in relation to the slogan as is sought to be projected

False representation that goods are of a particular standard, quality and composition

Anchor was restrained from using such offending words in the advertisement

Judgement – Unfair Trade Practice

BHANWAR KANWAR Vs R.K. Gupta & ANR

2009

These appeals involve a question of applicability of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, to a case in which a the respondent is accused of resorting to unfair trade practices involving false/misleading advertisement, medical negligence, criminal negligence and jeopardizing the safety of the innocent patients

Case Background

Respondent 1 Appellant

R.K. Gupta

Ayurvedic Medical

Practitioner, Varanasi

Bhanwan Kanwar

Mother of minor patient Prashant, New

Delhi

Charges pressed

Unfair Trade practicesMisleading advertisementMisrepresentation/FraudMedical negligence

Events and Facts Prashant (son of the appellant) suffered febrile convulsions

during the Fever at the age of six months

After repeated instances of such convulsion attacks the patient was treated by Associate Neurosurgeon Dr. Pangaria at AIMS, New Delhi

The appellant came across an advertisement in newspaper "Jan Satta" dated 8.8.1993 offering treatment of patients with fits with Ayurvedic Medicine

On establishing contact through letters, the respondent 1, assured the appellant through letter dated 23 Nov 1993, that he had specialised treatment for the problem faced by Prashant

Events and Facts (Cont’d)

There was a continuous reporting and dialog between the appellant and the respondent over the period of 2 years, where each time concern raised by Appellant was brushed

aside by the rhetoric of the Respondent “ This is Aurvedic Medicine and thus takes time to show effects”

But on the contrary since the administration of the medicines, Prashant’s health worsened

At this juncture the respondent repeatedly assured the appellant about the Ayurvedic composition of medicine which he claimed to be a combination more that

100 herbs

As advised by the respondent 1, the appellant with family visited the respondent’s clinic at Varanasi and paid a hefty consultation fees and subscribed to a year long

course of medication

Events and Facts (Cont’d)

Later it was investigated and discovered that the drugs prescribed by the respondent were actually

Allopathic Drugs That too which are prohibited for consumption by children

After administering the drugs for another year, finally the appellant approached the Neurologist at AIMS, only to find out that Prashant’s medical condition can never be

cured

After a gap of 23 months, there was a second meeting between the appellant and the respondent. At this point he prescribed few more tablets(white in colour)

claiming it to be more powerful

National Commission’s Verdict

Guilty of Unfair Trade practicesIt was established that the medicines prescribed by the Respondent 1 were allopathic medicines and not AyurvedicThis fact was not disclosed to the appellant which amounted to misrepresentationAlso the respondent was found guilty of medical negligence, in prescribing inappropriate medicine to treat the patient’s condition

Not guilty In the light of letter dated 24th February, 2003, by Secretariat Govt UP, respondent No.1 was entitled to prescribe Allopathic medicines, though he was an Ayurvedic practitioner

National Commission’s Verdict

Judgement• National commission quantified the compensation payable

to the aggrieved party as Rs. 500000 and directed the respondents to pay a sum of Rs. 250000 to the appellant and to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 250000 in account of consumer legal Aid of the National commission

Supreme Court of India Overruling with Strictures

The incident and treatment as alleged by the appellant relate to the period 1994 to 1997. Therefore, letter dated 24th February, 2003 is of no avail to the respondents as the same was not in existence during the period of treatment“The National Commission has already held that respondent No.1 was guilty of unfair trade practice and adopted unfair method and deceptive practice by making false statement orally as well as in writing. In view of the aforesaid finding, we hold that both Prashant and the appellant suffered physical and mental injury due to the misleading advertisement, unfair trade practice and negligence of the respondents. The appellant and Prashant thus are entitled for an enhanced compensation for the injury suffered by them. Further, we find no reason given by the National Commission for deducting 50% of the amount”

Surjeet Kaur Vs Maharshi Dayanand

University

The dispute arose when the University discovered that the respondent had been pursuing her M.A. in Political Science as a regular candidate and in the same academic session, the respondent was pursuing her B.Ed. Course in violation of General rules of Examination. The Appellant questioned the stance of National commission and direction given by District forum

Case Background

Respondent Appellant

Surjeet KaurMaharshi Dayanand University

Events and Facts Respondent took admission in 1994-95 to pursue M.A.

in political Science as a regular student in Government college

Applied for admission in B.Ed. In the same academic session. University informs the respondent of violation of clause 17 of General rules of examination

Respondent opts for M.A. and forgoes her B.Ed. Degree University issues a notification on 16-3-98 for

supplementary examinations. Respondent applies under the said notification for B.Ed. Examination and passes the same

Appellent university refuses to confer the degree of B.Ed. On the respondent. Respondent approaches district forum in 2000

Events and Facts (Cont’d) District forum passed an order in favour of respondent

on 24-4-04 despite objection from Appellant that the district forum had no jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint

Appellant filed an appeal before state commission which set aside the judgement of District forum

Respondent preferred a revision under section 21 of Consumer protection act, 1986 before the National commission

The National commission directed the appellant to issue the B.Ed. Degree

Tarun Gupta, the lead council made 3 submissions, which brought in to focus the general rules of examination which disallowed a student to pursue 2 courses simultaneously

Events and Facts (Cont’d) The lead counsel brought to fore the fact that the

District forum or the National commission cannot violate statutory provision

Perusal of the notification for supplementary examinations made it clear that it wasn’t meant for candidates like the respondent and she cannot plead for Estoppel

The court questioned the competence of District forum to entertain such a complaint under the act

The objective of the act is to cover in its net services offered and doesn’t intend to cover discharge of a statutory function

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The board is not a service provider and the student who takes an examination is not a consumer and the complaint under the act will not be maintainable against the board

The National commission did not take in to consideration that the respondent as a student is neither a consumer nor is the appellent rendering any service

The entire exercise of entertaining the complaint by the District forum and National commission do not conform to law and therefore, set aside.

The appeal is accordingly allowed.