Do The Rich Crush The LAW ?
(A microscopic study of the Consumer Protection Act 1986)
There is a famous saying that the law rushes the poor and the rich crush the law! The Consumer Protection Act 1986 was enacted to protect the interest of the consumer from the mighty and dominant hands of the manufacturer, distributer and shopper or the service provider who sells the goods or renders the promised service to the innocent customer by twisting facts and information about the product. Sometimes he changes the guarantee to warranty to save his skin.
There was a famous joke that once a Raja going through the bazaar heard the hand-fan seller shouting “Hand fan for Rs.100/-, 100 years guarantee!” The Raja stopped and asked, “What is the speciality of your hand-fan that makes it so costly?” But the vendor said, “Sir, 100 years guarantee.” Somehow the Raja purchased one hand fan. When the fan was used for few minutes, it broke. This made the Raja realize, that he is deceived, what if to the poor customer. However, he was passing the same place sometime later he heard the voice of the same man. He sent his men to get him arrested and punish him severely. But the Fan vendor pleaded him just to tell how the fan was used! Raja said, “It broke when it was being rotated once or twice”. “No, Sir”, exclaimed the fan vendor, “My terms of guarantee are that you should not rotate the fan but you, should keep the fan silent and rotate your head his side and that side!” This is the height of mischief that is practiced in sale of product – 10 years guarantee for the refrigerator, but this is twisted, “10 years for outer body and two years for inner parts excluding…. “
However, when the aggrieved customer goes to the Consumer Forum (CF), the Consumer Protection Act assures him simplicity of pleading, no need of a plant, no stamp duty, no representation of lawyer, n9 court procure, but in practice, strictly, the CF has become more strict court than the civil court and the lawyers are charging the fees not less than Rs.10,000 to 50,000. Concrete evidence is required like pucca receipts, executed contracts etc. with concrete evidence. Even the President of the CF comes like the Lord and non-judicial members too behave like him.
The conduct of proceedings is followed by regular trial by chronic adjournments prolonging the case to years and finally the strict application of case law which may annul the entire effort of the consumer in dismay. Adding fuel to the fire, postings and appointments of the President and members of the CF drags the case to further delay.
In one case, I remember, it was against the private telephone company for deficiency defective serve and unfair trade practices. The consumer’s case was delayed for want of posting of the President, and the poor non-judicial members have vested the time of the consumer by adjournments, posing as though the President and by doing as though justice is administered. The Gigantic Telephone provider, (Tata Teleservices) after several hearings in the written arguments came out that “The consumer Forum has no jurisdiction because of the Supreme Court’s Decision in the Civil Appeal 7687/2—7 where the lordships opined that when there is a special remedy provided under Section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act, regarding disputes in respect of telephone connection, bills and appliances, the remedy under Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred and further held that the “special law overrides the general law”. The Consumer Forum failed to apply the mind that the decision is relating to the public telephone providers and not private telephone providers. The CF harping on the tunes of the gigantic private telephone providers, who were seeking to save their skin for the follies done to the innocent customer. Although the complainant took the plea that Section 3 of the C.P. Act has an over-riding effect over all the laws to save the interest of the consumer, the CF did not consider the case and dismissed the complaint and thus the culprit was shielded by an institution which was meant to protect the interest of the consumer with a broad heart.
When the matter was pleaded before the TRAI they could not consider the plea and the Consumer went to the Ministry of Telecommunications, who on the other hand by this time passed an office order reverting back the matter and deciding that such cases have to be dealt with Consumer Forum only and the decision in the Apex Court was relating to the Pubic Telephone Companies and not private telephone operator. The office order of Telecom Ministry reads as under:-
- “References are being received regarding Telecom Consumers’ agitation throughout the country against ousting the jurisdiction of Consumer For a since 2009 as a consequence judgement passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, decided on 1-0-2009, wherein it has, inter-alia observed….In our opinion, where there is a special remedy provided in S.7B of Indian Telegraph Act regarding disputes in respect of telephone bills, then the remedy under the Consumer Protection Act is by implication barred…..”
- The matter has been examined in the Department. It is mentioned that the matter referred to in the Hon’ble Supreme Court involved a dispute between Department of Telecomunication (DoT) as a service provider proper to the hiring off of telecom service into a separate company namely Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL). Since DoT was also the authority, reference was made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the provisions of Section 7B. However powers of the telegraph authority have neither been vested nor available to the private telecom service providers and BSNL would not be available. The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgement is suigeneris in its application and has to be read with reference to the particular facts and circumstances of the case before it.
- Further while commenting on the implementing of provisions of National Telecom Policy 2012, related to amendment of Indian Telegraph Act to bring disputes between telecom consumers and service providers within the jurisdiction of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (District Forum) established under Consumer Protection Act, Legal Advisor, DoT opined that District Forums are already having jurisdiction and promulgation of ordinance is apparently not required.
- The District Consumer Forums are competent to deal with the disputes between telecom consumers and telecom service providers.
- The above position has been brought to the notice of Secretary, Department of Consumer Affairs, Govt. of India and Chief Secretaries Administrators of States/Union Territories for taking the matter up with the District Consumer Disputes redressal For a and the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the States/Uts.
- (Sd/- (Anand Agarwal) Director P & RB) Tel.23036032]
Since this simple matter was against the Tata Teleservices Ltd., the CF failed to understand the implication and mercilessly and ignoring all the pleas, mischiefs and false aversions of the telephone providers on unknown considerations, dismissed the case failing to conceive its jurisdiction, which should hitherto have been communicated by its higher authority and entertained what all the mischievous telephone provider stated.
A small violator of traffic rules, ids punished for derilecting the duty, what law comes to the punish those who occupy the seat of administrators of justice in the CF in blindly dismissing the complaint of the aggrieved consumer on the strength of Apex Court’s inapplicable case, despite the fact that proper precautions and feed back is given by the aforesaid order and what relief is given to the consumer who filed case No.CC No.1009/11 before the District Consumer Fo9rum, Hyderabad III, Hyderabad. The most regrettable situation is that when the aggrieved consumer has moved pillar to post and unearthed the aforesaid Order by which is expected that the District Forums and State Commissions are supposed to know the aforesaid provision of law since 2009 and the judgement is passed in 2014.
Even in spite of pointing out this order of the related CF, the plea was once again rejected contending that the “This Forum has no Revisional or Review Power”. What commonsense demands, the CF should have consulted the matter with the State and National Commissions, including the Government, before rejecting the complaint.
The Consumer approached the Dept of Telecommunications, Consumer Council again to enlarge the jurisdiction of the CF under the C.P. Act and the matter is lurking in view of the political changes and the aggrieved customer is taking his last breath of survival, that how the Consumer Protection Act was introduced with the promise of cheap, easy and fast judicial service, has become a dragon to swallow fair justice.
If a person of judicious look enters any of the Consumer Forum, he will understand as to how this sacred institution of administering fast remedy has become lethargic, to prove that civil courts are better in rendering justice.
When an aggrieved person cries from the top of the hill, several voices in the shape of echo ring every where, but a cry of the innocent consumer does not rhyme, although several departments are constituted to guard the rights of the customer. It is hoped that the new government in all reality and sincerity assure that a suitable protection in granted to the aggrieved customer, with cheap, fast and easy system of giving relief to the consumers, under the C.P.Act.
Author
Vazir Ahmed Khan, Resident Editor,
The Insurance Times, Kolkata – 7
