This document provides an overview of a study on consumer grievance redressal in Ramanathapuram District, Tamil Nadu. The study evaluates the performance of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF) in Ramanathapuram from 2005-2012. It aims to analyze the functioning of the DCDRF, opinions of complainants towards the forum, and assess the qualitative performance. The document outlines the objectives, scope, limitations, data collection methods, hypotheses, and chapter scheme of the study. Key findings include that there are delays in case disposal, complainants are unsatisfied with judgments, and the forum's performance is not commendable. Suggestions are provided to improve the forum's

1. A STUDY ON CONSUMER GRIEVANCE
REDRESSAL IN RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT –
TAMIL NADU
Public viva-voce - Alagappa University in partial fulfilment for the
Award of the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Commerce
Researcher
S. BALASUBRAMANIAN
(Reg.No.1690)
Research Supervisor
Dr. G. RAJARAM

2. INTRODUCTION
 Consumer is the focal point in modern
marketing.
 All
commercial
activities
revolved
around him.
 He is responsible for the culmination of
marketing activities viz sale.
 the marketer is not in a position to force a
consumer
to
accept
or
purchase
commodity or service produced by him
a

3. DEFINITION
A consumer can be defined as a person
who purchases goods or services for self
consumption. He causes disappearance
of the goods or service produced by the
marketer by consuming them. If anyone
purchases goods or services for reselling
the goods or services at a profit he
cannot be called as a consumer

4. SIGNIFICANCE OF A CONSUMER
 Consumer determines what should be
product or service.
 Consumer is a deciding factor in the
marketing activity.
 Consumer is a king in the field of marketing
 Unless the consumer is satisfied no goods
or service can be marketed.
 Indian consumer is a king without kingdom,
and sometimes even without any crown.

5. THE CONSUMER PROTECTON ACT, 1986
 The government of india by passing
Consumer Protection Act,1986.Three
tier system of Consumer Disputes
Redressal Agencies were establisted.
 This act has paved the way for the
establishment of the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.

6. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
To safeguard the interest of the
consumer from the unscrupulous
exploiters.The Consumer Protection
Act,1986 was passed.
This study is under taken to evaluate
the performance of DCDRF in
Ramanathapuram district.

7. REASON FOR SELECTING THE
TOPIC
 Though
a
lot
undertaken
to
of
studies
analyse
has
the
been
District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forums, in
India
the
Consumer
Ramanathapuram
Disputes
Redressal
District
Forum
remains virgin in this aspect and as a
sincere and dutiful resident of this district
the researcher has chosen this topic for his
study.

8. OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the study are as follows:
 To evaluate the functions of the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum in Ramanathapuram District – Tamilnadu.
 To analyse the opinion of the Complainants towards the
functioning of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
namely, 2005-2012.
 To assess the qualitative performance of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum in the study period.
 To study the comparative opinions of the stakeholders on the
functioning of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
and
 To offer suggestions based on the findings of the study.

9. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
 The study is confined to evaluate the quantitative
and qualitative performance of CDRF in Tamil
Nadu during the period of the study.
 The study evaluate the quantitative performance
in terms of the number of cases filed, disposed
and pending and evaluate the qualitative
performance by analysing the attitude of
complainants, defendants, members of the fora,
advocates and office bearers of consumer
organizations towards the functioning of the fora.

10. LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
 The study pertains to Ramanathapuram
District - Tamilnadu for the period 20052012 only.

11. NATURE AND SOURCES OF DATA
COLLECTED FOR THE STUDY
 Both primary data and secondary data have
been used for the study.
 Primary data have been collected with the help
of the questionnaire prepared exclusively for
this purpose.
 Secondary data have been collected from the
records of the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum in Ramanathapuram District,
that of the Government of Tamil Nadu and
India, books, journals, reports and websites.

12. DATA PROCESSING AND TOOLS FOR
ANALYSIS
The data collected have been analysed with the help of
computer,keeping in view the objectives of the study.For the
purpose of analysis,appropriate statistical tools have been
used:
1) Standard Deviation
2) Co-efficient of Variation
3) Chi-square Test
4) Garret Ranking technique
5) Trend Analysis
6) Percentage Anaysis and
7) Regression Analysis.

13. HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses have been framed to ascertain the
objectives of the study:
 There is no significant relationship between the factors
such as Age, Education, Income and Occupation of the
Complainants and their attitude towards the method of
lodging complaints with the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum.
 There is no significant relationship between the factors
responsible for the slow disposal of cases.
 There is no significant relationship between the socioeconomic variables like Age, Sex, Education, Occupation
and the Income of the Respondents and the attitude
towards the desirability of engaging advocates.
 There is no significant relationship between the seven
factors upon which the complainants act in favour of
engaging advocates.

14.  There is no significant relationship between the
seven factors upon which the complainants are
not in favour of engaging advocates.
 There is no significant relationship between the
socio-economic variables of the complainants
and their attitude towards a proposal to
establish DCDRF at
sub-division level
.
 There is no significant relationship between
eight factors upon which the attitude of
defendants for the slow disposal of the cases in
DCDRF Ramanathapuram.
 There is no significant relationship between the
factors upon which the desirability of
defendants towards engaging advocates to
defend the cases in DCDRF Ramanathapuram.

15.  There is no significant relationship between the
opinion of beneficiaries on the DCDRF
Ramanathapuram encouraging consumers to
argue their cases by themselves.
 There is no significant relationship between the
factors causing the advocates to seek so many
adjournments and delay the early disposal of
the cases in DCDRF in the study area.

16. SAMPLING DESIGN
Convenient
Sampling
method
has
been used in the study for collecting
required primary data. Two Hundred
and Fifty Nine (259) male respondents
and 41 female respondents totaling to
300 respondents have been chosen
for the study. So the Sample unit
consists of 300 respondents.

17. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS
 To avoid ambiguity or wrong interpretation the following
important concepts used in the thesis have been defined.
 Complainant - A consumer or Voluntary Consumer
Organization and in case the consumer dies his legal
heirs.
 Complaint – A written allegation by a complainant as to
unfair trade practice, defect in the product or service,
overpricing and sale of hazardous goods.
 Consumer – Definition for it has already been given.
 Consumer Dispute – Denial of the allegation by the
supplier of goods or services.

18. Defect – Any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in
the quality, quantity, potency or specified standard.
Disputes – The forum established by the state in
each district for consumer redress.
Redress – Setting right or rectifying a wrong either
by paying compensation or repairing or replacing.
Unfair Trade Practice – False representation of
goods or Services as to quality or quantity and
reconditioning second hand or old goods and selling
them as new one.

19. CHAPTER SCHEME
There are seven chapters in the thesis.
 The first chapter relates to introduction, importance of
the study, statement of the problem, hypotheses,
sampling design, limitations of the study, nature and
source of data and operational definition of concepts.
 The second chapter reviews the literature available on
the topic both Indian and Foreign.
 The Third chapter deals with consumer movement in the
world, India and Tamil Nadu, Consumer and
Consumerism, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and
profile of Ramanathapuram District.

20.  The Fourth chapter pertains to the critical evaluation of
the functioning of the Ramanathapuram District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, procedures for
preferring complaints, number of cases filed, settled and
pending disposal from 2005 to 2012 and the views of the
consumers as to filing of complaints and their disposal.
 The Fifth chapter concentrates on awareness of the
consumer about their rights, evaluation of qualitative
performance of Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum in
Ramanathapuram District and the impact of judgments
on the consumer and the trader.

21. •The Sixth chapter contains the opinion of the
stakeholders on the functioning of the Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum in Ramanathapuram
District as its subject matter.
•The Seventh chapter contains the summary of
findings, suggestions and conclusions and scope for
further research on the topic.

22. FINDINGS IN THE STUDY
 Though the consumer himself can prosecute the case
there is a feeling that
appointing an advocate is
desirable as he can conduct it efficiently and effectively.
 The idea of starting a consumer redressal forum in the
sub-divisional level
is not supported much.
 Majority of the respondents opines that there is enough
furniture though the space and staff available in the
forum is inadequate.
 Undue delay is there in the disposal of complaints by the
forum.
 The respondents are not that much satisfied with the
judgment delivered by the forum.

23.  A large number of consumers feels that the Consumer
Protection Act,1986 is the best among legislations enacted
in India so far, for protecting its interest.
 The business community is unhappy over the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 and feels that it is detrimental to its
interests.
 It is interesting to note that The Consumer Protection Act,
1986 has little impact on business community. It does
what it did before the year 1986, that is before the passing
of the Act.
 It is heartening to note that the consumers are able to
have easy access to the Ramanathapuram District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum.

24.  The environment of the Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum is much conducive to consumers.
 The Ramanathapuram District Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum does not follow the principles of Natural justice in
Consumer Disputes Redress.
 The engagement of an advocate in consumer redressal
matters increases the cost of litigation thereby dissuading
the consumers from approaching the Forum.
 The cost of approaching the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum is far cheaper as compared to that in a civil
court.
 Ramanathapuram District Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum’s performance in the disposal of complaints from
consumers is not that much commendable.

25. SUGGESTIONS
On knowing the actual state of affairs in
Ramanathapuram District Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum, naturally one is tempted to pose a question whether the
researcher offers any suggestions for rectifying the
shortcomings in its functioning and for ensuring that it does
what is expected of it. The suggestions offered by the
researcher can broadly be grouped in to five viz:
 To the Government
 To the officials of The Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum.
 To the Advocates.
 To the voluntary Consumer Organisation and
 To the consumers.

26. To the Government
 Evolving some criterion for awarding
cost and interest to the complainant.
 Discouraging the filing the
unscrupulous complaints by the
Consumers by punishing them
heavily.
 Appointment of reputed persons in
the district as non legal members of
the Forum.

27.  Disposal of complaints as easily as
possible and in no time.
 Increasing the frequency of the
meeting of the Forum as much as
possible.
 Appointing a full time District judge
instead of a retired one as the
president of the Forum.
 Payment of decent honorarium to the
members of the Forum

28.  Creation of better infrastructure
facilities in the campus of the Forum.
 Computerizing all the records and
proceedings of the Forum.
 Monitoring of the Forum by
theStateCommission at regular
intervals.
 Training the non judicial members
sufficiently, So that they can function
well.

29.  Co-ordinating the functions of The
District Forum, State Commission and
the National Commission.
 Extending the help of Legal Aid
centre to a consumer Who can not
afford to spend on preferring a
complaint to the District Forum.

30. To the officials of District Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum.
• Speedy and timely disposal of the
complaints.
• Justice delayed is justice denied must be
the Governing factor for the Forum.
• Creation of a separate monitoring agency
to oversee the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum.
• Compelling appearance of the consumer
only when it is utmost essential.

31. • Fixing a time frame for the disposal of
each and every complaint.
• Giving preference to old cases in the
matter of disposal.
• Avoiding frequent and innumerous
adjournment as much as possible.
• Granting a long time with a condition that
the case will be decided on the adjourned
day compulsorily.

32. To The Advocates
Seeking many adjournments by the
business man like civil cases may
be avoided, so that the complaint
is disposed of at the earliest

33. To the Voluntary Consumer Organisation
 Creation of awareness about the rights
and responsibilities of the consumers
by organizing seminars and workshops
for the public often.

34. To the Consumer
 Filing the case in the Forum without the assistance of
any lawyer so that the cost of litigation is reduced
considerably. For doing so it would be better for the
consumer for attending the seminars and workshops
organized by its authorities concerned.

Avoiding frivolous complaints against the
Government, Quasi Government and the business
houses.

35. CONCLUSION
 Adequate staff and number of working days are
increased its function would be highly appreciated by
everybody in the area.
 The purpose of enacting the Consumer Protection
Act,1986 is to provide speedy and economic relif to the
grievances of consumers where as the present scenario
in the district is not that much commendable.
 The Producers/Providers of service in the district must
realize that their activities based on social
responsiveness to the consumer needs would be highly
appreciated.

36. SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The following priority areas can be selected for further
research.
1. Historical developments of Consumer Protection Laws
in India
2. Functioning of Consumer Protection Agencies in India
3. Case Study of Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission.
4. Case Study of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
5. Role of Voluntary Consumer Organizations in
Consumer Protection
6. Case Study of Voluntary Consumer Organization
7. Comparative study of rural and urban Consumer
Organizations
8. Appraisal of Consumer Protection Measures adopted in
different States.
9. Role of Business Organizations in Consumer Protection
10. Comparative Study of organized an unorganized
Agencies engaged in Consumer Protection