The Hindu : A better deal for consumers

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Mar 16, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

A better deal for consumers

By R. Desikan

Recently, at a seminar held in Chennai under the auspices of the Consumers Association of India, Satwant Reddy, IAS, Additional Secretary in the Department of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Food, Government of India, announced that very soon the amendments to the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 that were passed in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha and given assent to by the President, will be notified. These amendments are very important and will bring in a lot of clarity to the Act. They will also enable the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Fora, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to dispose of petitions faster.

Though the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 is one of the best user-protective legislations in the world, it has been neutralised by injection of civil court procedures, perhaps because the Presidents were District Judges. Perhaps, their own "soaked-in" experience played a very significant role in deciding procedures.

Consumer activists all over the country felt and understood that the Consumer Protection Act is meant to dispose of cases and petitions summarily in consultation with two members who are nominated by the State Government from amongst well-known public citizens. Instead, a whole lot of procedures came to play, with the result that there are over three lakh cases pending in the 500 and odd District Fora, 27 State Commissions and one National Commission. Therefore, the current amendment is likely to provide some relief in the disposal of petitions. This is possible only if and when old pending cases are disposed of. I have, at the conclusion of this article, suggestions for achieving zero pendency of cases.

Advantage Consumer, the monthly news bulletin of the Consumer Protection Council, Rourkela, has summarised these amendments in its February 2003 issue. I quote Advantage Consumers.

1. Exclusion of even services availed of for commercial purposes (earlier only goods were excluded). This should help to drastically reduce the load on the consumer courts, thereby making them oriented only to the disputes of ordinary consumers.

2. Power to pass interim order, if required. Till now the consumers had to wait till the conclusion of a case and passing of the final order by the Forum, while continuing to incur financial loss or otherwise till the hearing is completed.

3. Provision for the National Commission and the State Commissions to establish multiple benches for speedy disposal of cases. Till now only a single bench has been functioning in these bodies.

4. Before preferring an appeal in the State Commission or in the National Commission, the appellant will be required to deposit 50 per cent of the amount ordered by the Forum or Rs. 25,000, whichever is less, in the case of a State Commission and Rs. 35,000 in the case of the National Commission. Till now the appellants were not required to deposit any amount. Thus, there was no disincentive for prolonging the disputes and causing harassment to the consumers.

5. The District Forum has been given power to award punitive damages where deemed necessary. Till now, the consumer courts could award only the cost and estimated loss suffered by them. The punitive damages could be used as a deterrent when no pecuniary loss is substantial.

6. It has been made mandatory for the State Governments to establish State Consumer Protection Councils. Similarly, they shall establish District Consumer Protection Councils under the chairmanship of the District Collector to promote and protect consumer interest.

7. Each complaint made in a District Forum shall be charged a fee fixed by the State Government. This means that the consumer disputes redressal, which is available free of cost, will be charged henceforth. This could discourage many of the consumers with nominal claim approaching the consumer courts for justice.

8. The District Forum will now entertain complaints with a value of up to Rs. 20 lakhs, the State Commission beyond Rs. 20 lakhs and up to Rs. 1 crore and the National Commission beyond Rs. 1 crore. The substantial increase in the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Forums could be counter-productive as they are the weakest links in the three-tier quasi-judicial machinery.

9. The National Commission has been empowered to review its orders. This is a welcome change as otherwise the people have to rush to the Supreme Court, even in case of gross errors.

10. Notices can now be served even by fax. This will help in speedier disposal of cases.

11. To ensure that the complaints get the relief intended by the consumer courts, they will be able to attach the property of the opposite party and subsequently dispose of it to recover the amount due to the complainant. The District Collector will play a vital role for recovery of the amount from the opposite party. The earlier provision of sentencing the opposite party to a jail term was found to be more difficult to enforce and the complainant got nothing from such an action. Hence this change.

I hope the State Government immediately passes the necessary orders to accept the amendments. It is also my considered feeling that the National Commission, the State Commission and the District Fora should be brought to clear all the pending petitions immediately. I would strongly urge the Consumers Affairs Ministry of the Government of India to appoint a special officer in the rank of a Director or Joint Secretary, to liaise with State Governments.

That officer should persuade them to give a plan of action to dispose of pending cases on or before October 2, so that from the date of birth of Mahatma Gandhi, consumers in this country can look forward to the special privilege of getting their petitions disposed of within 90 days, as prescribed in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

A war-like effort is needed to make the Consumer Protection Act a real manna from the heaven. After all, this suggestion of mine comes out of 16 years of experience in handling the Consumer Protection Act.

(The writer is Trustee, Consumers Association of India, CONCERT.)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

A fund for the needy... or the greedy?

In the name of the people

MPs, MLAs and videotape

Unearthing the truth

A better deal for consumers

A directionless panel