By Avneesh Kumar and Pinkeshwar Gangwar
Today in this age of privatization and globalization consumer is at the centre of every economy. Different multinational and national companies try to attract the consumers through different methods as like advertisement, discount policies, and many other ways. But, as we know that the main motive of different companies and corporate entities is to make profit, hence many times they indulge in fraudulent practices and deceitful policies, which results ultimately in great detriment and loss to the consumer. Hence a responsibility lies on the government that it should provide adequate regulatory and legislative framework for the protection of the consumers.
To protect the consumers from the dishonest policies of corporate bodies, Indian government enacted Consumer Protection Act in 1986. The Act covers in its broad ambit different types of services as like banking, airlines, educational services, medical services, housing services, insurance services, railways services, etc. Moreover it has provided three tier grievance redressal mechanisms of consumer courts namely District Forum, State Commission, and National Commission.
After the enactment of the Act it worked excellently for initial 10-12 years, but after that its use continuously went on to be decreased year by year. In today’s time it seems that the Act has become defunct. The first and foremost reason for this is the lack of awareness among the general public about the provisions of the Act. In rural India the people are not at all aware of this Act, and even in big cities the people are not well equipped with information about the act and different consumer forums.
Who can file a complaint?
Under the Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, only four types of persons can file a complaint against the manufacturer of goods or services, namely:
- The consumer who bought the goods, or who consumed them.
- Recognised Consumer Association.
- One or more consumers on behalf of many consumers having the same problem.
- Central or State Government.
Under the Consumer Protection Act those persons who have purchased the goods for resale are not allowed to file a complaint. The individual customers are generally not interested in bringing claims against big companies, but the intermediate sellers would be much more interested in bringing claims against companies because when a product is bad it is also detrimental to the interests of the intermediate seller along with the manufacturing company.
They are in fact in a much better position to bring claims against the companies, because generally they suffer more loss than an individual consumer, and they are quite acquainted with the manufacturing company and the legal mechanisms. Hence along with the individual consumers the intermediate sellers should also be allowed to bring a claim against the manufacturing company for dishonest practices or defected products.
But are not recognised. An association, even if unrecognised, would be in a better position to file complaints against the companies hence even the unrecognised consumer associations and non-governmental organizations should be allowed to file a complaint under the Act.
Grounds of the Complaints
The grounds, on which a complaint can be made under CPA, are quite limited. There are only five grounds for filing an appeal namely —
- Unfair trade practices or restrictive trade practices.
- When goods are defective.
- When services are deficient.
- When trader charges a price in excess of the price printed on package or fixed by law.
- When the goods are hazardous to life and safety, and their sale is prohibited by law.
But in today’s time the consumer might have so many grievances which may not fall in any of these categories as like if proper information is not provided about the ingredient of some eatable (i.e. packaged juice, biscuit, etc), or where the product is without a printed price on its package (it gives a chance to the trader to take excessive price from the buyer).
Hence the grounds for filing the complaint should not be limited; instead power should be given to the consumer courts to entertain a complaint even if it is not based on any of these grounds but it is based on any other reasonable ground. The Act must be amended in this regard. Moreover these steps must be taken in this regard:
Essential Information about the Product or Service
A complaint must be allowed if proper information about the product has not been provided on the product or about the service. Like in the case of foods, if the food was genetically modified; or if there was any unnatural or abnormal process involved in manufacturing of it (any chemical process).
Secret Terms/Conditions
Many times the companies provide dubious or undisclosed terms with regard to the use of products or services. Therefore, the manufacturers must be obliged to disclose the terms in advance or a complaint must be allowed for non-disclosure of any of the terms. Those terms which are not properly disclosed must be disregarded by the courts.
Liberal interpretation
The consumer forums must be allowed to accept a complaint on any other ground which may arise in future, and which is based on just and reasonable grounds. This flexible approach is required because water-tight rules may work against the principles of justice in particular cases.
Negligence
Negligence must also be included as a ground for complaint in the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), 1986. In the case of Poonam Verma v. Ashwin Patel & Ors, (AIR 1996 SC 2111) it was held by the Supreme Court that negligence by a doctor would be a sufficient ground to admit a complaint under the CPA, 1986; in the same case the court also awarded damages to the tune of Rs. 3 lakh for the negligent conduct.
Functioning of Consumer Courts
In the past it has been seen that the functioning of the consumer courts is deteriorating. Many times questions have also been raised on the integrity and transparency of consumer courts. Many times it has been alleged by the complainants that the consumer courts are not people friendly.
Hence, the officers of the consumer courts should be trained extensively so that they can be skilful in their job. Steps should also be taken to continuously vigil the functioning of these courts so that these courts can function with integrity and in a corruption free environment.
The problem of pendency is also increasing in consumer courts, very few cases are settled within the prescribed time frame of consumer protection act (i.e. 90 days). More and more stress should be placed on timely disposal of cases and financial resources should also be provided to the consumer courts for this purpose.
Moreover, we should provide a mechanism through which the consumer can file a complaint online (known as e-filing). It would save so much time and money.
Ultimately there is a suggestion for a comprehensive review of Consumer Protection Act. Although one amendment to the Act is pending in the parliament but the amendment suggested in it are not sufficient to bring the Act in tune with the required changes. Hence the Act should be made more people friendly and suitable amendments should be brought in this regard.
More and more stress should be placed on the proper functioning of the consumer courts and awareness programs should be organized at massive scale to make people aware about the provisions of the Act.
The following are the suggestions in the end
- Special emphasis must be provided on several service sectors as like healthcare, legal services, educational services etc. There is widespread exploitation of customers in these sectors, and moreover it is extremely difficult to bring light on the cases of mismanagement in these sectors as the nature of these services is quite informal, and at every stage there are chances of exploitation.
- There may be many matters which might not be dealt by the members of the consumer forums, therefore proper facilities must be provided to the forum so that they can seek the opinions of experts in different areas like medical science, marketing, etc. It would make the judgments more rational, objective, and speedy.
- At many places the consumer courts are not functioning properly, and there have been news of mismanagement and irregularities. Therefore a proper vigil system must be established which can keep an eye on the functioning of these consumer forums; this move would ensure accountability and transparency.
- The consumer courts must be empowered to take up a case even if it is pending in the civil courts as far as it is related to the consumer affairs. In the case of Om Prakash vs Assistant Engineer, Haryana Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and Others [(1999) 3 SCC 19] it was held by the Supreme Court that a consumer court can deal with a matter even if it was pending in a district court as the act has been designed to decide the matters speedily.
- There must be a provision in the consumer protection act that every consumer forum must prepare a report on the number of cases filed and decided by it every year. Many times the consumer forums do not decide a case in the prescribed time period, and the entire objective of establishing consumer forums is frustrated. The reporting system would remove such loopholes and provide speedy justice.