consumer protection Act policies

2. *
Qualification & Disqualification Of Directors
DISQUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS
LIMITS ON NUMBER OF DIRECTORSHIPS
DIRECTOR IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (DIN)
DOCUMENTS FOR OBTAINING DIN
APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTORS
DUTIES OF A DIRECTOR
RESIGNATION OF DIRECTOR
REMOVAL OF A DIRECTOR
VACATION OF OFFICE OF DIRECTOR
ANNUAL ROTATION OF DIRECTOR
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST BY DIRECTOR

3. *
 Qualification & Disqualification Of Directors
 The Act provides for a dedicated provision, which is
Section 162 that underlines the explanations that an
individual might not appoint as a director. there’s no
such provision regarding the qualification under the
Act.
However, requirements are listed as below:
 1.The said person should have completed 18 years age
or above.
 2. Nationality are often that of Indian or otherwise.

4. *
 3. The person must be in receipt of his own Digital
Signature Certificate (DSC) and the same be used for
obtaining Director’s identification number (DIN).
 4. The person shall also furnish a written declaration
providing his consent to act as the Director and he’s not
someone who falls under the category of disqualified
members.
 5. there’s no academic qualification that has to be held
by the one who is desirous of obtaining the directorship
of a corporation.

5. *
 Does not include any person who buys goods for
resale or commercial purpose and services for
commercial purpose
 However any person who buys goods for
commercial use but exclusively for his livelihood
by means of self employment is a consumer.
 Legal heir of consumer in case death of consumer

6. Karnataka Power
vs.
Ashok Iron Works Private Limited,
(S.C.)
Decided on : 9th February, 2009
The Supreme Court has decided that the person
includes a company therefore the company
registered under the Companies Act is a
consumer and can file a complaint before the
consumer Forum/ Commission. Section 2 (1) (m)

7. C. Venkatachalam vs. Ajitkumar C. Shah & Ors. (S.C.)
Decided on :- 29th August, 2011
 In this complaint filed before the Consumer Forum, Mumbai in which the
district consumer forum held that on authorised agent has no right to act and
plead before the consumer forum and some other forums has decided that
non advocates can appear then the issue was taken to the state commission
and the state commission has reverse the view, therefore the large no of the
cases where the authorised agents were appearing had come to stand still .
 the State Commission order was challenged in two writ petitions before the
Bombay High Court. The petitions were allowed by the Division Bench.
 The High Court in the impugned judgment held that a party before the District
Consumer Forum/State Commission cannot be compelled to engage services of
an advocate.
 The order of the High Court was confirmed by the Supreme court.

9. HIERARCHY
DISTRICT FORUM
STATE COMMISSION
NATIONAL COMMISSION
SUPREME COURT

10. CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
LEGAL NOTICE
COMPLAINT
(Section 12 -Two Years)
JURISDICTION
TERRITORIAL
JURISDICTION
PECUNIARY
JURISDICTION

11. Where Opposite
Party(ies) actually
or voluntarily
resides
Where the cause
of action,
wholly or in
part, arises
Where Opposite
Parties carries on
business or has a
branch office

12. Subodh Kumar Baheti vs. Delhi Development Authority,
29th October, 2012 (NCDRC)
Petitioner Subodh Kumar Baheti who is resident of Bhilwara, Rajasthan filed a consumer
complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhilwara, Rajasthan
against the OPs No.1 & 2, namely, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi and Nodal
Branch of ICICI Bank, Green Park Extension, New Delhi who are respondents No.1 & 2
respectively herein.
After hearing both the parties and looking into the matter, it was decided by the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal as:-
Forum dismissed the complaint on the ground that since the opposite parties did not
reside under the jurisdiction of the District Forum and the cause of action also did not
arise in its jurisdiction and hence the District Forum did not have jurisdiction to deal
with the complaint.
Conclusion:- the complainant cannot invoke the jurisdiction of Consumer
forum on the basis of his residence.

13.  M/S. Sonic Surgical vs. National Insurance
Company Ltd on 20 October, 2009 (S.C.)
o It appears that there was a fire on 13-14th February, 1999 at 10.00 p.m. in the go down of the
appellant at Ambala. For claiming compensation, the appellant filed a claim petition before the
Consumer Commission of the Union Territory, Chandigarh constituted under Section 17 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter for short 'the Act'). The said claim petition filed by
the appellant herein was allowed by the Consumer Commission of the Union Territory,
Chandigarh. On appeal, the NCDRC allowed the appeal of the respondent herein on the ground
that the Consumer Commission at Chandigarh had no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate
the complaint. We are in agreement with the view taken by the NCDRC.
o In our opinion, no part of the cause of action arose at Chandigarh. It is well settled that the
expression 'cause of action' means that bundle of facts which gives rise to a right or liability. In
the present case admittedly the fire broke out in the go down of the appellant at Ambala. The
insurance policy was also taken at Ambala and the claim for compensation was also made at
Ambala. Thus no part of the cause of action arose in Chandigarh.
o No doubt this would be departing from the plain and literal words of Section 17(2)(b)
of the Act but such departure is sometimes necessary (as it is in this case) to avoid
absurdity. In the present case, since the cause of action arose at Ambala, the State
Consumer Redressal Commission, Haryana alone will have jurisdiction to entertain
the complaint.

14.  Where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any, claimed
does not exceed Rupees twenty lakhs (District Forum).
 Exceeds Rs. Twenty Lakhs but does not exceed Rs. One Crore (State
Commission - Section 17)
 Exceeds Rs. One Crore (National Commission) Section 21
 Quality Foils India Private Limited vs. Bank od Madura Ltd.
And Anr., Decided on 30th May, 1996 (NCDRC)
Held, the criteria determining valuation for jurisdiction purpose is to refer it to
the quantum of relief put together i.e. the aggregate value of goods, service and
compensation as the case may be by the aggrieved consumer the result of claim
that may be ultimately granted is not to be taken into consideration for this
purpose
Therefore the above case was clearly fell within the jurisdiction of the state
commission and appeal allowed case remanded to the state Commission for
retrial of the compliant on merits in accordance with the law.

15. KISHORI LAL BABLANI
vs.
M/S. ADITYA ENTERPRISE & 4 ORS.
Decided on 29th May, 2012 (NCDRC)
The complainant in the present case is seeking possession of the said flat and,
therefore, for all intent and purposes, value of the flat in question should be
considered as the same on which the complainant had agreed to purchase the
flat.
The complainant mainly seeks the possession of the flat in question which he
purchased at a price of Rs.40,70,000/- besides some interest and compensation.
We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that valuation of the claim made by
the complainant cannot in any case exceed Rupees One crore. As per the
provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, a complaint where claim is upto
Rupees One crore, is to be filed before the State Commission having jurisdiction
in the matter. We, therefore, hold that this Commission has no pecuniary
jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint.

16. Ambrish Kumar Shukla and Ors.
vs.
Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. ORS.
Decided on 7th October, 2016 (NCDRC)
The primary object behind permitting a class action such as a complaint under Section
12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act being to facilitate the decision of a consumer
dispute in which a large number of consumers are interested, without recourse to each of
them filing an individual complaint, it is necessary that such a complaint is filed on
behalf of or for the benefit of all the persons having such a community of interest. A
complaint on behalf of only some of them therefore will not be maintainable. If for
instance, 100 flat buyers/plot buyers in a project have a common grievance against the
Builder/Developer and a complaint under Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection
Act is filed on behalf of or for the benefit of say 10 of them, the primary purpose behind
permitting a class action will not be achieved, since the remaining 90 aggrieved persons
will be compelled either to file individual complaints or to file complaints on behalf of or
for the benefit of the different group of purchasers in the same project. This, in our view,
could not have been the Legislative intent.
Continued on next slide……..

17. If non appears on behalf of complainant / Opposite Party
Complainant
Dismiss in default
 Where an order is passed by the
National Commission dismissing the
complaint in default, the aggrieved
party may apply to the National
commission to restore the compliant in
the interest of justice.
 Section 22A of Consumer Protection
Act
Opposite Party
Ex-parte order
 Where an order is passed by the National
Commission ex parte against the
opposite party, the aggrieved party may
apply to the National Commission to set
aside the said order in the interest of
justice.
 Section 22A of Consumer Protection
Act

18. Complainant
Dismissed in default
District Forum
State Commission
National Commission
Opposite Party
EX PARTE
District Forum
State Commission
National Commission
Appeal
Appeal
If non appears on behalf of complainant / Opposite Party
Appeal
Appeal

19. WRITTEN STATEMENT / REPLY
The written statement or reply of the case to be submitted within a period of thirty days
or such extended period not exceeding fifteen days as may be directed by the district
forum from the date of receiving of copy of Compliant. (Section 13(1)(a))
Dr. J.J. Merchant & Ors.
Vs.
Shrinath Chaturvedi
(S.C.) Decided : 2002
The three judge bench at this court - the National Commission or the State
Commission is empowered to follow the said procedure. From the aforesaid Section it
is apparent that on receipt of the complaint, the opposite party is required to be given
notice directing him to give his version of the case within a period of 30-days or such
extended period not exceeding 15 days as may be granted by the District Forum or the
Commission.
For having speedy trial, this legislative mandate of not giving more than 45 days in
submitting the written statement or the version of the case is required to be adhered. If
this is not adhered, the legislative mandate of Disposing of the cases within three or
five months would be defeated.

20. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
vs.
HILLI MULTIPURPOSE COLD STORAGE PVT. LTD.
(S.C.), Decided : 2013
We are, therefore, of the view that the judgment delivered in the
case of Dr. J.J. Merchant (supra) holds the field and therefore,
we reiterate the view that the District Forum can grant a further
period of 15 days to the opposite party for filing his version or
reply and not beyond that..
Kailash vs. Nanhku & Ors. [(2005) 4 SCC 480] the view taken
in this matter was not affirmed and the view taken in JJ
Merchant was affirmed.

21. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANR
vs.
M/S MAMPEE TIMBERS AND HARDWARES PVT LTD AND ANR
(S.C.) Decided: 2017
The question involved in this appeal is whether the time
stipulated under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
for filing written statement is mandatory and whether no
flexibility is available with the Court in the interest of justice.
we consider it appropriate to direct that pending decision of the
larger bench, it will be opened to the concerned FORA to accept
the Written Statement filed beyond the stipulated time of 45 days
in an appropriate case, on suitable terms, including the payment
of costs, to proceed with the matter.

22. Written Argument by both the parties
Evidence by Opposite Party
Final Argument
Rejoinder
(Its not Mandatory but Subject to filling)
Evidence by complainant

23. STATE COMMISSION JURISDICTION
Original Jurisdiction
 If the value of goods or
services and compensation
is more than 20 Lac but less
than Rs. 1 Crore
 If the value of goods or
services and compensation
is more than 20 Lac but less
than 50 Lac than Complaint
to be filed along with a fees
of Rs. 2000/- in form of
demand draft
 If the value of goods or
services and compensation
is more than 50 Lac but less
than 1 Crore than Complaint
to be filed along with a fees
of Rs. 4000/- in form of
demand draft
Appellate Jurisdiction
 Any person aggrieved by order made by
District Forum, an appeal to be filed within
30days to the State Commission.
 Provided 50% of such amount or Rs. 25,000/-
, whichever is less to be deposited in form of
Fixed Deposit in favour of Commission.
Notice
(to be continued on next Slide)
Continued on next Slide……

24. Notice
If not filed within 30 days then move an application for condonation of delay
Notice issued to the Opposite party on Application
Delay
Delay condoned or Appeal dismissed
Application for Stay
District Forum records may be called
Either 50 or 100 percent decreed amount
to be deposited and matter to be fixed for
Final Argument
Note :- Only one appeal is allowed in CPA.

25. NATIONAL COMMISSION JURISDICTION
Original Jurisdiction
 If the value of goods or
services and compensation is
more than 1Crore than
Complaint to be filed along
with fees of Rs. 5000/- in
form of demand draft
(Section 21)
Appellate Jurisdiction
 Any person aggrieved by order made by
State Commission, an appeal to be filed
within 30 days to the National
Commission.
 Provided 50% of such amount or Rs.
35,000/-, whichever is less to be deposited
in form of Fixed Deposit in favour of
Forum.
Aggrieved party may file an appeal against the order of National
Commission (Original Jurisdiction) before the Supreme Court
within a period of 30 Days from the date of receiving of order.

26. CRUX OF APPEAL
DISTRICT FORUM (Section 12)
STATE COMMISSION (Section 15)
Appeal (30 DAYS)
NATIONAL COMMISSION
ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION
Section 17
REVISION
Reg. 14 CPR,2005
(90 DAYS)
APPEAL
(Section19)
(30 DAYS)
SUPREME COURT
APPEAL
(Section23)
(30 DAYS)
REVISION IN FORM
Art. 136 of COI
OF SLP (90 DAYS)
ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION
Section 21

30. Procedure Follows-------------
*

31. IT Update
18th May 2016
*
Choose the correct forum for filing the complaint.
Draft complaint
If being represented by an advocate or any other representative, attach
an authorisation letter.
Attach documents supporting complaint
Clearly mention the relief being sought from the opposite party.

32. *
Pay prescribed fee along with complaint before the forum
Sign complaint and a solemn affirmation stating that the facts mentioned
are verified and are true and correct.
In case of delay, of more than two years from date of action, enclose an
application seeking condoning of the delay.
Hand deliver the complaint or send it by registered post.

33. IT Update
18th May 2016
*
• Choose the correct forum for filing the complaint
• Each agency has both a Territorial and Pecuniary jurisdiction.
• The complaint needs to be filed with the Court within whose
jurisdiction the opposite party/parties either resides, has office or
where the cause of action arose.
• If there are multiple opposite parties involved, the complaint can be
filed at the Forum within whose jurisdiction one of the opposite
parties resides or carries on business.
• The pecuniary jurisdiction (i.e. the amount involved in the
consumer dispute) for the District Forum is up to Rs 20 lakhs and
above Rs 20 lakhs but up to Rs 1 crore for the State Commission.

34. IT Update
18th May 2016
*
• Draft your complaint carefully mentioning the correct and complete
details such as your name, address, the name and address of all the
opposite parties and the facts pertaining to your case.
• It is important to be factual and avoid any exaggeration in your
application

35. IT Update
18th May 2016
*
• You do not need an advocate to represent you before the Consumer
Court.
• In case you are being represented, you will need to attach an
authorisation letter

36. IT Update
18th May 2016
• Attach documents supporting your complaint including copy of the
bills, transactions IDs, communication with the brand/ opposite
parties.
*

37. IT Update
18th May 2016
• Clearly mention the relief being sought from the opposite party
• The consumer can ask for compensation, refunds, damages,
litigation costs, and interest amount on funds tied up etc.
• Remember that the amount of compensation or other relief can be
as per the pecuniary limits of the forums
*

38. IT Update
18th May 2016
• You need to pay a prescribed fee along with your complaint before
the forum.
*

39. IT Update
18th May 2016
• Ensure that you sign your complaint and give a solemn affirmation
stating that the facts mentioned are verified and are true and
correct.
Step 7 – Solemn Affirmation of Facts

40. IT Update
18th May 2016
• The Act provides for a limitation period of two years from the date
of cause of action for the aggrieved customer to file a complaint
with the consumer court.
• In case of delay, you also need to enclose an application seeking
condoning of the delay.
Step 8 – Condoning of Delay

41. IT Update
18th May 2016
• You can hand deliver the complaint or send it by registered post.
• A minimum 5 copies of the complaint need to be filed with the
forum along with additional copies for each opposite party
Step 9 – Deliver the Complaint

42. IT Update
18th May 2016
After receiving the complaint, the District Forum shall, on
receipt of a complaint, refer a copy of the complaint to the
opposite party mentioned in the complaint directing him to give
his version of the case within a period of thirty day
On Receipt of Complaint