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
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
Protection 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
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

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
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 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

UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE
Adopting unfair methods to promote sale,
misleading public about price, goods or service,
charging above MRP printed on product etc
Example HPCL case
Goods which are hazardous to life and safety when used
Example Selling goods after their expiry date


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.

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 DMello 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 maintainable 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 India
except 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 100
2 Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 5
lakh
200
3 Rs. 5 lakh to Rs. 10
lakh
400
4 Rs. 10 lakh to Rs.
20 lakh
500
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 action
Sends the copy of lab report
VERDICT
If opposite party admits:
Consumer forum decides
the matter on the merits of
the case




Consumer Forum
Laboratory
Opposite party
Consumer
VERDICT
If opposite party denies or
fails to take action
Consumer 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
Appellate power of the state commission

Appellate power of the National Commission

Appeal to supreme court
2008
Respondents claim in the advertisement of being the ONLY toothpaste
containing all 3 ingredients viz: Calcium, Fluoride and triclosan
Respondents 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
Case 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
Colgates Cibacca
variant
Usage of
optimum quantity
of fluoride
protects against
tooth decay
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
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
practices
Misleading
advertisement
Misrepresentation
/Fraud
Medical
negligence

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
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, Prashants 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 respondents
clinic at Varanasi and paid a hefty consultation fees and subscribed to a year long
course of medication
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 Prashants 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
Guilty of Unfair Trade practices
It was established that the medicines prescribed by the Respondent
1 were allopathic medicines and not Ayurvedic
This fact was not disclosed to the appellant which amounted to
misrepresentation
Also the respondent was found guilty of medical negligence, in
prescribing inappropriate medicine to treat the patients 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

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
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
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 Kaur
Maharshi
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 (Contd)
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 (Contd)
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 wasnt 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 doesnt intend to cover discharge of a
statutory function

Supreme Courts 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.