Consumer protection act,1986


Published on

Business Law

Published in: Education, Business
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Consumer protection act,1986

  1. 1. Presented By:Aaruni Shukla(090102001)Akansha Awasthi(090102003)Akash Sharma(090102004)Amriteshwar Pratap Singh(090102007)Ankit Baliyan(090102008)Ankit Gupta(090102009) Presented To:Vishal Kumar(090102087)Abhishek Pachisia(090102801) Mrs. Shalini Mittal Group 1 (I.T.)
  2. 2. To know what this act is about, we should first know •Who is a CONSUMER? •What are GOODS? •What are SERVICES?Consumer Awareness:It is about making the consumer aware of his/her rights. Ankit Gupta
  3. 3. The Act enshrines all the consumer(s) rightswhich are internationally accepted.The Act was introduced togive the rules and regulationsregarding consumer welfarethe form of a law. Ankit Gupta
  4. 4. Right to SafetyRight to InformationRight to ChooseRight to be HeardRight to Seek RedressalRight to Consumer Education Ankit Gupta
  5. 5. The Consumer Protection Act 1986 is a social welfare legislationThe main object of the legislature in the enactment of this act is:  To provide for the better protection of the interests of the consumer  To make provisions for establishment of consumer councils and other authorities for settlement of consumer disputes and matter.This Act of 1986, applies to all goods and services, excludinggoods for resale or for commercial purpose and services renderedfree of charge and under a contract for personal service. Akansha Awasthi
  6. 6. Quasi judicial machinery:Observe the principles of natural justiceGive reliefsImpose penaltiesThe main object of these bodies is to provide speedy andsimple redressal to consumer disputes. Akansha Awasthi
  7. 7. Complaint:No stamp or court fee is needed.A complaint can be hand written or typed.Admitted if it is filed within two years from the date on which thecause of action has arisen.According to Three Tier System it is decided in which commission orforum the hearing of case will be. Aaruni Shukla
  8. 8. Jurisdiction under Consumer Protection Act 1986Consumer Courts: A three-tier-systemA. National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission: claims above Rs. 20 lakh.B. Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission or State Commission: Claims from Rs 5 to 20 lakh.C. Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum or District Forum: Claims upto Rs 5 Lakh Aaruni Shukla
  9. 9. When can a consumer can launch a complain or What should bethe nature of complaint?a) Any unfair trade practice adopted by the traderb) Defective goodsc) Deficiency in serviced) Excess price charged by the tradere) Unlawful goods sale, which is hazardous to life and safety whenused. Abhishek Pachisia
  10. 10. Format of complaint:Complaint are addressed to ICRPC (by post / courier) duly signed.State date wise facts in the following format: (complaints by e-mail not accepted)Page one: Name, Address, Residence telephone, E-mailaddress (Mandatory). Membership fee of Rs. 300 or transaction number if paid online.Page two: Full name, registered address of the OppositeParties, telephone no’s, fax number and e-mail address. Abhishek Pachisia
  11. 11. Page three onwards: Complaint with date wise facts, refer to thepage numbers of the attached documents where ever required.RELIEF: On the last page, mention what relief that you are looking for againstEnclose: Only one set of Xerox copies of supporting documents. (Which are disposed off and the documents after discarded 6 months).Enclose: One year membership subscription of Rs. 300 by draft in favour of "ICRPC" payable at "Mumbai”.Online payment: Send a request e-mail for online payment procedure to Abhishek Pachisia
  12. 12. Class actionsCPA Section 2 (1) (b) - filing of a complaint by a consumer, any voluntary consumer association Registered under companies Act 1956 or under any other law. In case of death of a consumer , his legal representative may ,make a complaint.Penalty under Section 27 CPAA trader or the complainant fails to comply with an order made bythe relevant consumer forum is liable for punishment(s): Imprisonment- 1 month to 3 Yrs. Fine – Rs.2000- to Rs.10,000- Vishal Kumar
  13. 13. What can be the nature of relief granted to a consumer?a) Repair of defective goods.b) Replacement of defective goods.c) Refund of the price paid for the defective goods or service.d) Removal of deficiency in service.e) Refund of extra money charged.f) Withdrawal of goods hazardous to life and safety.g) Compensation for the loss or injury suffered by the consumer due to negligence of the opposite party.h) Adequate cost of filing and pursuing the complaint o In 90 days complaint should be decided from issuing date. o 150 days in case of sample testing. o Time limit can be extended due to practical problems. Vishal Kumar
  14. 14. The salient features of the Act are: It covers all the sectors whether private, public, and cooperative or any person. It enshrines the rights of consumers. The Act also takes care of establishment of Consumer Protection Councils. The Act envisages a three-tier quasi-judicial machinery. Ankit Baliyan
  15. 15. Reebok dealer ordered to pay compensation(Reebok Dealer vs Harpreet Kanwar )July 13,2009CHANDIGARH: Consumer Court has ordered a Reebok shoe dealer to pay Rs 5, 000 as compensation to Harpreet Kanwar for not entertaining herrequest to change her shoes, which were of smaller size even after a long waitof eight months, she claimed.It is notable that Harpreet, a residence of Sector 44, purchased one pair ofshoes of particular design and size UK 9 from Reebok Outlet on July 7 in 2008but when she opened the shoe box, the pair of shoes which she had purchasedwas not found therein and instead a wrong size of pair of shoes.This girl reported this to the manager of the outlet, who asked her to visit theoutlet on July 22 to exchange it. The complainant had visited the showroom anumber of times to exchange the shoes but he failed to do the same and everytime took an excuse of non-availability of stock. Moreover, he also did notissue any exchange slip. Amriteshwar Pratap Singh
  16. 16. When the dealer delayed the matter for about eight months, the complainant fileda complaint against him in Consumer Court on March 6 this year. This is admittedby the dealer that the complainant had visited his premises three to four times butshe could not be given the exact pair due to the unavailability of the stock.However, she was also requested to get back the money of Rs 1,797, the price of theshoe pair, which she refused flatly.It is also claimed that the complainant had purchased the shoes for her morningwalks and physical exercise to keep her physically fit but due to the careless delayof the showroom manager, she could not do so as a result her weight increasedand her health deteriorated, which caused her great mentally and physicallyharassment.After hearing the both sides of the argument, the Consumer Court directed thetrader to refund the amount of Rs1,794, the price of the shoes and also pay to thecomplainant a sum of Rs5,000 as compensation within 30 days of receipt of a copyof the order, failing which the entire amount will carry interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum since the date of filing of the case. The dealer would also be liableto pay the litigation cost of Rs 1,100. Amriteshwar Pratap Singh
  17. 17. School gets rap for retaining feeTNN, Nov 29, 2010, 12.50am ISTCHANDIGARH: Terming the act of KBDAV School, Sector7, Chandigarh, unjustified in retaining the total fees of a student who had decidednot to pursue his studies at the institute, UT district consumer disputes reprisalforum directed it to refund the admission fee after deducting administrativecharges and processing charges.The forum observed, "In our opinion, educational schools or institutions cannotbe permitted to behave like business establishments that work with a profitmotive. The respondent school is an education institution/school and cannot actlike a commercial establishment and there is no justification on the part of therespondent in retaining the substantial fees paid by a student, who decides not topursue his/her studies in the said school/institution."Complainant Ainesh Chandra, who had field an application through his fatherArun Chandra, a resident of Nayagaon, alleged that he took admission in Class VIin the school for the session 2010-11 and deposited admission fee of Rs 15,900 onFebruary 17 this year. Akash Sharama
  18. 18. He was told that classes would start on April 7. He also appeared in the test foradmission at St John’s School, Sector 26, Chandigarh, the result of which wasdeclared on March 25 and he was successful.After considering his options, he decided to take admission in St John?s Schooland deposited a fee of Rs 11,135. Thereafter, he surrendered the seat in therespondent school before the start of the classes and sought a refund. Hecontacted DAV a number of times and on May 12, they handed over a cheque forRs 3,000 against the deposit of Rs 15,900.In their written reply, the respondent stated that the deposit of fee was towardsadmission and tuition fee for three months, which was non-refundable in view ofrules mentioned on page 30 of the school diary.Further, the rules regarding non-refund of fees and other charges were dulydisplayed on the notice board, which were never challenged by the complainant.It was pleaded by the respondent that caution money of Rs 3,000 was refunded tothe complainant after making deductions according to school rules. Akash Sharama
  19. 19. The consumer forum stated that in its view, the respondents could deduct someamount towards processing fee and administrative charges and the balanceamount should be refunded."Therefore, we are of the view that the respondent was unjustified in its act byretaining the total fees of Rs 15,900 of the complainant. The respondents shouldhave, at the most, deducted a sum of Rs 1,000 only, towards processing fee andadministrative charges, which they have incurred at the time of admission of thecomplainant," the forum stated.The forum directed the respondent to refund Rs 11,900 (after deducting Rs 1,000as service/processing/administrative charges and Rs 3000 which has alreadybeen refunded to the complainant) along with litigation costs of Rs 5,500. Akash Sharama
  20. 20. Group 1 (I.T.)