- Welcome to India Consumer Forum.
Recent posts
Pages1
#1
Judgements / Bank penalised for deficiency ...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 14, 2025, 11:07 AMVijaya Bank, Bandra Branch Vs. Mrs. Pooja G. Joshi
Appeal No.801 of 2003
In the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Judgement Pronounced on 23.10.2008
Mrs. Pooja G. Joshi(Respondent) operates a Saving Bank Account with Vijaya Bank, Bandra Branch. In addition,the respondent operates two Current Accounts with the said Bank under her firms' names. It was averred that Mrs. Joshi had deposited a sum of Rs.5 lakh in the SB Account No.22305 by filling in the printed pay-in-slip issued to her by the bank in the bound book. The then Chief Manager of the bank accepted the cash and in token thereof put his initial/signature on the counter-foil and also stamped it with the rubber stamp of the bank. It was averred that the amount was paid to the Chief Manager of the bank as at that time, the cashier was not available at the cash counter. In support of the said deposit, Mr. Joshi produced the counter-foil of pay-in-slip bearing the date as 3.6.1997.
However, in August 1998, the respondent's Chartered Accountant, to whom the relevant papers had been handed over for the purpose of filing the income-tax return, brought to her notice the non-credit of Rs.5 lakh by the bank into the respondent's account. The respondent, thereafter, took up the matter with the bank and enquired about the credit entry of Rs.5 lakh missing from her account. She also sent a letter dated 15.9.1998 addressed to the bank along with xerox copy of the counter-foil in respect of the deposit of Rs.5 lakh. The appellant, by its letter dated 16.9.1998, acknowledged the respondent's letter dated 15.9.1998 and stated in its reply that the transaction of the deposit did not pertain to the cash transaction referred to by the respondent in the counter-foil of pay-in-slip dated 3.6.1997 and called upon the respondent to prove the original challan. The respondent sent rejoinder to the said letter as also further reminders dated 3.3.2000 and 29.6.2000, to which the appellant sent reply dated 3.7.2000 confirming the fact that the acknowledgement appearing in the counter-foil of the pay-in-slip was that of the then Chief Manager, Mr.Rajiv Shetty, but did not explain of non-credit of the said amount in her account.
As there was no response, the respondent served a Notice through her advocate on 7.8.2000 upon the Bank that their omission and failure to give credit of the amount in her account constitutes deficiency in service and called upon the bank to rectify her account by giving credit of the amount to respondent's account failing which legal action shall be initiated.
As per the appellant, reply was sent but the same was received back unserved. Since the appellant failed to elicit any reply to the Show-cause Notice or the settlement of the account, the respondent filed complaint before the State Commission. The appellant filed its reply denying any deficiency in service, as alleged, in not giving credit of Rs.5 lakh to the account of the respondent complainant. It was, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint made was false as well as beyond time and, as such, should be dismissed. On merits, it was asserted that the complainant had not deposited the sum of Rs.5 lakh in her account as claimed and that being so, there is no question of crediting the said amount in her SB Account. The appellant in para-8 of the reply set out the procedure followed by it in receiving and accepting cash deposit by its account holders in their account saying that the same is tendered to the cashier who, on receipt, accepts the same with pay-in-slip and endorses by putting the bank's rubber stamp and his initials on the counter-foil or the pay-in-slip, which is returned to the depositors. It was denied that on 3.6.1997 its cashier was not available, as alleged. It was further stated that the counter-foil produced by the respondent is the acknowledgement of the Chief Manager which clearly shows clearing of transfer transaction only and not cash transaction, as has been alleged. The purported counter-foil may have been issued for transfer or for clearing a cheque of Rs.5 lakh and subsequently the instrument might have been deposited with the appellant under the purported counter-foil. The counter-foil might have been returned back to the respondent and against the same, the Department/Section of the appellant might not have collected the counter-foil as the present action was not foresighted and, as such, it was beyond the scope of imagination.
The State Commission held that the appellant was deficient in rendering service to the respondent, as it had failed to give credit of Rs. 5 lakh in the respondent's account. That the appellant had failed to prove that it did not receive the amount of Rs. 5 lakh. Accordingly, the appellant was directed to credit and pay a sum of Rs.5 lakh to the respondent with interest at the rate of 7.5 % p.a. w.e.f. 3.6.1997 till realization and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh. The complaint was accepted with costs which were estimated at Rs.10,000/-.
The Bank then filed an Appeal in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the State Commission's Order.
Judgement
The National Commission heard the arguments of the both counsels and held that, for the reasons stated below, it did not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Bank against the State Commission's Order and dismiss the same with costs which are assessed at Rs. 20,000/-.
The counter-foil undisputedly is in the prescribed format of the pay-in-slip kept and maintained by the bank in its ordinary course of business for deposit of cash/cheque by its account holders and is bound in a book form.
The bank has not led any evidence to show that money had not been received. The appellant has not filed the affidavit in evidence of the Chief Manager who had put his signatures and the rubber stamp of the bank on the counter-foil. It is he who could have been in a position to rebut the assertion made by the respondent in an effective manner. Instead of filing the affidavit of the then Chief Manager, the appellant has filed the affidavit of Shri Shailesh Charcha, the Assistant Manager of the bank who did not have any personal knowledge of the transaction.
The amount being heavy and due to non-availability of the cashier at the cash counter, the appellant had deposited the amount with the Chief Manager. The appellant has not filed the affidavit of the cashier concerned. The bank has simply denied this fact. It could have filed an affidavit of the cashier concerned being its employee which has not been done which is a militating factor against the defense put up by the appellant.
Respondent in her complaint had stated that she had sent a legal notice through her counsel to which no reply was received from the appellant which fact has been countered by the bank by stating that in fact reply to the legal notice was sent but the same was returned unserved. The State Commission has recorded a finding after examining the closed postal envelope which was made available, evidences its transmission but postal endorsement made is not legible. No steps were taken thereafter to endorse the copy thereof to the respondent complainant who was in continuous correspondence with the bank. An adverse inference has been drawn against the appellant by the State Commission and, in our view, rightly.
From the discussion above, we have no hesitation in concurring with the findings recorded by the State Commission that the respondent had in fact deposited a sum of Rs. 5 lakh with the appellant bank and there was deficiency of service on the part of the appellant in giving credit of the sum of Rs. 5 lakh to the respondent. The appellant had failed to prove that it had not received the sum of Rs. 5 lakh as alleged by the respondent complainant.
Appeal No.801 of 2003
In the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Judgement Pronounced on 23.10.2008
Mrs. Pooja G. Joshi(Respondent) operates a Saving Bank Account with Vijaya Bank, Bandra Branch. In addition,the respondent operates two Current Accounts with the said Bank under her firms' names. It was averred that Mrs. Joshi had deposited a sum of Rs.5 lakh in the SB Account No.22305 by filling in the printed pay-in-slip issued to her by the bank in the bound book. The then Chief Manager of the bank accepted the cash and in token thereof put his initial/signature on the counter-foil and also stamped it with the rubber stamp of the bank. It was averred that the amount was paid to the Chief Manager of the bank as at that time, the cashier was not available at the cash counter. In support of the said deposit, Mr. Joshi produced the counter-foil of pay-in-slip bearing the date as 3.6.1997.
However, in August 1998, the respondent's Chartered Accountant, to whom the relevant papers had been handed over for the purpose of filing the income-tax return, brought to her notice the non-credit of Rs.5 lakh by the bank into the respondent's account. The respondent, thereafter, took up the matter with the bank and enquired about the credit entry of Rs.5 lakh missing from her account. She also sent a letter dated 15.9.1998 addressed to the bank along with xerox copy of the counter-foil in respect of the deposit of Rs.5 lakh. The appellant, by its letter dated 16.9.1998, acknowledged the respondent's letter dated 15.9.1998 and stated in its reply that the transaction of the deposit did not pertain to the cash transaction referred to by the respondent in the counter-foil of pay-in-slip dated 3.6.1997 and called upon the respondent to prove the original challan. The respondent sent rejoinder to the said letter as also further reminders dated 3.3.2000 and 29.6.2000, to which the appellant sent reply dated 3.7.2000 confirming the fact that the acknowledgement appearing in the counter-foil of the pay-in-slip was that of the then Chief Manager, Mr.Rajiv Shetty, but did not explain of non-credit of the said amount in her account.
As there was no response, the respondent served a Notice through her advocate on 7.8.2000 upon the Bank that their omission and failure to give credit of the amount in her account constitutes deficiency in service and called upon the bank to rectify her account by giving credit of the amount to respondent's account failing which legal action shall be initiated.
As per the appellant, reply was sent but the same was received back unserved. Since the appellant failed to elicit any reply to the Show-cause Notice or the settlement of the account, the respondent filed complaint before the State Commission. The appellant filed its reply denying any deficiency in service, as alleged, in not giving credit of Rs.5 lakh to the account of the respondent complainant. It was, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint made was false as well as beyond time and, as such, should be dismissed. On merits, it was asserted that the complainant had not deposited the sum of Rs.5 lakh in her account as claimed and that being so, there is no question of crediting the said amount in her SB Account. The appellant in para-8 of the reply set out the procedure followed by it in receiving and accepting cash deposit by its account holders in their account saying that the same is tendered to the cashier who, on receipt, accepts the same with pay-in-slip and endorses by putting the bank's rubber stamp and his initials on the counter-foil or the pay-in-slip, which is returned to the depositors. It was denied that on 3.6.1997 its cashier was not available, as alleged. It was further stated that the counter-foil produced by the respondent is the acknowledgement of the Chief Manager which clearly shows clearing of transfer transaction only and not cash transaction, as has been alleged. The purported counter-foil may have been issued for transfer or for clearing a cheque of Rs.5 lakh and subsequently the instrument might have been deposited with the appellant under the purported counter-foil. The counter-foil might have been returned back to the respondent and against the same, the Department/Section of the appellant might not have collected the counter-foil as the present action was not foresighted and, as such, it was beyond the scope of imagination.
The State Commission held that the appellant was deficient in rendering service to the respondent, as it had failed to give credit of Rs. 5 lakh in the respondent's account. That the appellant had failed to prove that it did not receive the amount of Rs. 5 lakh. Accordingly, the appellant was directed to credit and pay a sum of Rs.5 lakh to the respondent with interest at the rate of 7.5 % p.a. w.e.f. 3.6.1997 till realization and to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh. The complaint was accepted with costs which were estimated at Rs.10,000/-.
The Bank then filed an Appeal in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the State Commission's Order.
Judgement
The National Commission heard the arguments of the both counsels and held that, for the reasons stated below, it did not find any merit in the appeal filed by the Bank against the State Commission's Order and dismiss the same with costs which are assessed at Rs. 20,000/-.
The counter-foil undisputedly is in the prescribed format of the pay-in-slip kept and maintained by the bank in its ordinary course of business for deposit of cash/cheque by its account holders and is bound in a book form.
The bank has not led any evidence to show that money had not been received. The appellant has not filed the affidavit in evidence of the Chief Manager who had put his signatures and the rubber stamp of the bank on the counter-foil. It is he who could have been in a position to rebut the assertion made by the respondent in an effective manner. Instead of filing the affidavit of the then Chief Manager, the appellant has filed the affidavit of Shri Shailesh Charcha, the Assistant Manager of the bank who did not have any personal knowledge of the transaction.
The amount being heavy and due to non-availability of the cashier at the cash counter, the appellant had deposited the amount with the Chief Manager. The appellant has not filed the affidavit of the cashier concerned. The bank has simply denied this fact. It could have filed an affidavit of the cashier concerned being its employee which has not been done which is a militating factor against the defense put up by the appellant.
Respondent in her complaint had stated that she had sent a legal notice through her counsel to which no reply was received from the appellant which fact has been countered by the bank by stating that in fact reply to the legal notice was sent but the same was returned unserved. The State Commission has recorded a finding after examining the closed postal envelope which was made available, evidences its transmission but postal endorsement made is not legible. No steps were taken thereafter to endorse the copy thereof to the respondent complainant who was in continuous correspondence with the bank. An adverse inference has been drawn against the appellant by the State Commission and, in our view, rightly.
From the discussion above, we have no hesitation in concurring with the findings recorded by the State Commission that the respondent had in fact deposited a sum of Rs. 5 lakh with the appellant bank and there was deficiency of service on the part of the appellant in giving credit of the sum of Rs. 5 lakh to the respondent. The appellant had failed to prove that it had not received the sum of Rs. 5 lakh as alleged by the respondent complainant.
#2
Judgements / Builder directed to pay compen...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 14, 2025, 11:05 AMMrs Veena Khanna of New Delhi
Vs
M/s. Ansal Properties and Adharshila Towers, New Delhi
Before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Order dated 9th July 2007
--------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Veena Khanna(Complainant) of New Delhi had offered to purchase a flat for a total consideration of Rs.23,33,344/-from M/s. Ansal Properties and Adharshila Towers, New Delhi (Respondents) in response to their advertisement. The Complainant paid a total sum of Rs.15,12,000/- on different dates and stopped payment of the balance amount as there was no progress in the construction work. The Opposite Party had agreed to deliver the flat by 1.6.1999 but the flat was not delivered as it was not constructed.
The Complainant had demanded refund of the deposited amount with interest @ 18% which the Opposite party refused to pay. Complainant filed a petition on 13.09.2000 before the State Commission, Delhi. By judgement and Order dt.06-12-2005, the State Commission directed the Opposite Party to refund the amount of Rs.15,00,000 with interest @ 13% p.a. from the date of deposit of the last instalment till the date of payment of refund. In the alternative it also directed that if the Opposite Parties choose to handover the possession of the flat, the order of refund with interest will not come into operation.
Against the above Order of State Commission the Complainant Mrs. Veena Khanna filed an Appeal in the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission praying that the Opposite Parties be directed to deliver the possession of the flat and also compensation for delay in delivery or adequate compensation should be awarded so that she can purchase a flat of the size. It was argued that as the afore-quoted order passed by the State Commission gave preferable alternative to the Opposite Parties, and the builder took undue advantage of it and refunded the amount deposited by the complainant with interest, as directed, because of the rise in the prices of the immovable properties. Opposite Parties took advantage only because an option was given to either refund the amount or to hand-over possession of the flat and no adequate compensation was awarded.
The Opposite Party argued that it is wrong and is denied that any fixed time period was stipulated between the parties or that Respondents have failed to complete the construction. It is also wrong and is denied that any deficiency in service has been committed by Respondents. The correct position is that structure of the flat has already been completed and finishing jobs have already been taken in hand and are progressing rapidly. The flat is likely to be completed in all respects shortly and the possession will then be handed over to the Complainant. The Complainant is not entitled to resile from the concluded contract between the parties in a unilateral and arbitrary manner or to ask for refund of the amounts already paid to the Respondents or any Interest thereon. The Respondents have already invested a huge amount on the construction of the flat on the basis of construction agreement between the parties and it is too late in the day for Complainant to resile from the said construction agreements. It is wrong and is denied that the Complainant has suffered any damage as alleged or at all. It is also denied that the Complainant has suffered any mental agony, mental torture or harassment at the hands of the Respondents. The complainant is put to a strict proof of each and every allegations made by her.
With regard to allegations made in para 8 wrongly numbered as para 9. it is wrong and is denied that the Respondents are liable to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- or any amount whatsoever to the complainant. It is also wrong and is denied that there has been any deficiency of service on the part of any of the Respondents. The claimant is not entitled to any amount whatsoever nor any interest as alleged or at all. It is also wrong and is denied that the claimant is entitled to any costs as alleged. In fact, it is the respondents who should be awarded costs against the Complainant for filing false and frivolous complaint against the respondents.
From the allegations made in the complaint, it is crystal clear that the claimant wishes to resile from the agreements entered into between the parties for reasons best known to her. One such reason could be that in the recent past property prices have seen downward trend, as such, the claimant wishes to back out from the contract in a dishonest manner. Had the prices gone up, she would never have submitted any complaint or asked for refund or cancellation of the arrangements. The Very fact the complainant is seeking the cancellation of the agreement and refund of the amount paid, no allegations of deficiency of service survives on the face of it and on this ground alone the complaint is liable to be dismissed summarily.
Judgement
After considering the arguments of the counsels representing both the parties the Commission decided that the Complainant is required to be compensated for delay in construction of the flat and for not allotting the same to the her. Because of the delay in construction and delay in deciding the matter, it is practically impossible for a retired Govt. employee to purchase a flat at the present price. Therefore, there are two alternatives - (a) one is to give adequate compensation for delay and to direct the Opposite Parties to hand-over possession of an alternative flat in the vicinity of the area where the flat was allotted to the Complainant; (b) or secondly, to pay adequate compensation to enable the Complainant to purchase a new flat of the same area in the same or similar locality.
In this view of the matter, this Appeal is allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- as compensation to the Complainant. This is on the presumption that the value of the flat has escalated.
However, if the builder considers that compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees seven lakhs and fifty thousand) is more or excessive, it would be open to the builder to provide an alternative flat of the size and price agreed, in the same locality or near about, to the complainant for which an appropriate allotment letter will be issued by them in favour of the Complainant within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order. If the same is not issued, it shall pay compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- to the complainant, as directed.
Vs
M/s. Ansal Properties and Adharshila Towers, New Delhi
Before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi
Order dated 9th July 2007
--------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Veena Khanna(Complainant) of New Delhi had offered to purchase a flat for a total consideration of Rs.23,33,344/-from M/s. Ansal Properties and Adharshila Towers, New Delhi (Respondents) in response to their advertisement. The Complainant paid a total sum of Rs.15,12,000/- on different dates and stopped payment of the balance amount as there was no progress in the construction work. The Opposite Party had agreed to deliver the flat by 1.6.1999 but the flat was not delivered as it was not constructed.
The Complainant had demanded refund of the deposited amount with interest @ 18% which the Opposite party refused to pay. Complainant filed a petition on 13.09.2000 before the State Commission, Delhi. By judgement and Order dt.06-12-2005, the State Commission directed the Opposite Party to refund the amount of Rs.15,00,000 with interest @ 13% p.a. from the date of deposit of the last instalment till the date of payment of refund. In the alternative it also directed that if the Opposite Parties choose to handover the possession of the flat, the order of refund with interest will not come into operation.
Against the above Order of State Commission the Complainant Mrs. Veena Khanna filed an Appeal in the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission praying that the Opposite Parties be directed to deliver the possession of the flat and also compensation for delay in delivery or adequate compensation should be awarded so that she can purchase a flat of the size. It was argued that as the afore-quoted order passed by the State Commission gave preferable alternative to the Opposite Parties, and the builder took undue advantage of it and refunded the amount deposited by the complainant with interest, as directed, because of the rise in the prices of the immovable properties. Opposite Parties took advantage only because an option was given to either refund the amount or to hand-over possession of the flat and no adequate compensation was awarded.
The Opposite Party argued that it is wrong and is denied that any fixed time period was stipulated between the parties or that Respondents have failed to complete the construction. It is also wrong and is denied that any deficiency in service has been committed by Respondents. The correct position is that structure of the flat has already been completed and finishing jobs have already been taken in hand and are progressing rapidly. The flat is likely to be completed in all respects shortly and the possession will then be handed over to the Complainant. The Complainant is not entitled to resile from the concluded contract between the parties in a unilateral and arbitrary manner or to ask for refund of the amounts already paid to the Respondents or any Interest thereon. The Respondents have already invested a huge amount on the construction of the flat on the basis of construction agreement between the parties and it is too late in the day for Complainant to resile from the said construction agreements. It is wrong and is denied that the Complainant has suffered any damage as alleged or at all. It is also denied that the Complainant has suffered any mental agony, mental torture or harassment at the hands of the Respondents. The complainant is put to a strict proof of each and every allegations made by her.
With regard to allegations made in para 8 wrongly numbered as para 9. it is wrong and is denied that the Respondents are liable to pay Rs. 20,00,000/- or any amount whatsoever to the complainant. It is also wrong and is denied that there has been any deficiency of service on the part of any of the Respondents. The claimant is not entitled to any amount whatsoever nor any interest as alleged or at all. It is also wrong and is denied that the claimant is entitled to any costs as alleged. In fact, it is the respondents who should be awarded costs against the Complainant for filing false and frivolous complaint against the respondents.
From the allegations made in the complaint, it is crystal clear that the claimant wishes to resile from the agreements entered into between the parties for reasons best known to her. One such reason could be that in the recent past property prices have seen downward trend, as such, the claimant wishes to back out from the contract in a dishonest manner. Had the prices gone up, she would never have submitted any complaint or asked for refund or cancellation of the arrangements. The Very fact the complainant is seeking the cancellation of the agreement and refund of the amount paid, no allegations of deficiency of service survives on the face of it and on this ground alone the complaint is liable to be dismissed summarily.
Judgement
After considering the arguments of the counsels representing both the parties the Commission decided that the Complainant is required to be compensated for delay in construction of the flat and for not allotting the same to the her. Because of the delay in construction and delay in deciding the matter, it is practically impossible for a retired Govt. employee to purchase a flat at the present price. Therefore, there are two alternatives - (a) one is to give adequate compensation for delay and to direct the Opposite Parties to hand-over possession of an alternative flat in the vicinity of the area where the flat was allotted to the Complainant; (b) or secondly, to pay adequate compensation to enable the Complainant to purchase a new flat of the same area in the same or similar locality.
In this view of the matter, this Appeal is allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- as compensation to the Complainant. This is on the presumption that the value of the flat has escalated.
However, if the builder considers that compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- (Rupees seven lakhs and fifty thousand) is more or excessive, it would be open to the builder to provide an alternative flat of the size and price agreed, in the same locality or near about, to the complainant for which an appropriate allotment letter will be issued by them in favour of the Complainant within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order. If the same is not issued, it shall pay compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- to the complainant, as directed.
#3
Courier Services / Re: Complaint regarding servic...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 14, 2025, 11:01 AMIt is not clear why you made an ID with Shadowfox and what services you had availed from them.
#4
Courier Services / Complaint regarding services f...
Last post by deepak9265 - Feb 13, 2025, 11:28 AMI had made an ID. To register this ID, your agent called me and made me pay Rs. 299. I had told him earlier that I live in Surat city. And if I want to work in Sxxxxn area I must have said this 10 times, only after he told me I confirmed about it, I had done shadowfax on him for Rs 299
So I was asked to take delivery the day before but I did not get any delivery here. I did not get it that day either. I did not get it the next day either. I have not got delivery here for the last several days. I called that agent and messaged him, he is not replying, he is saying that I will get it, I will get it, but I did not receive a single order. I sent a call message to your Axxxxn but he is not replying and on top of that he has blocked me on WhatsApp, so this is cheating, you guys have taken Rs 299 empty I want a refund right now because I got this 299 to reduce the side effects but it is not working, there is not a single order in it, so I want my 290 refunded.If I don't want it then I will file an FIR regarding this Situation.
My refund has not come yet, what is happening, you people created my ID from a fake account and took Rs. 299 but nothing works, is shadowfax a job to make fools, are you people lying? Do you people grab money like this by telling lies?
Deepak
Surat 394230, Gujarat
So I was asked to take delivery the day before but I did not get any delivery here. I did not get it that day either. I did not get it the next day either. I have not got delivery here for the last several days. I called that agent and messaged him, he is not replying, he is saying that I will get it, I will get it, but I did not receive a single order. I sent a call message to your Axxxxn but he is not replying and on top of that he has blocked me on WhatsApp, so this is cheating, you guys have taken Rs 299 empty I want a refund right now because I got this 299 to reduce the side effects but it is not working, there is not a single order in it, so I want my 290 refunded.If I don't want it then I will file an FIR regarding this Situation.
My refund has not come yet, what is happening, you people created my ID from a fake account and took Rs. 299 but nothing works, is shadowfax a job to make fools, are you people lying? Do you people grab money like this by telling lies?
Deepak
Surat 394230, Gujarat
#5
Information about Consumer Protection Act 2019 / How to file a complaint in Con...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 12, 2025, 02:50 PMManner in which complaint shall be made under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019:
(1) A complaint in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or any service provided or agreed to be provided may be filed with a District Commission by -
(a) the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service provided or agreed to be provided;
(b) any organisation consumer association whether the consumer to whom the goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or service provided or agreed to be provided is a member of such association or not;
(c) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Commission on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested; or
(d) the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, either in its individual capacity or as a representative of interests of the consumers in general.
(2) Every complaint filed under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied with such amount of fee and payable in such manner as may be prescribed.
(3) On receipt of a complaint made under sub-section (1), the District Commission may, by order, allow the complaint to be proceeded with or rejected.
Provided that a complaint shall not be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the complainant.
Provided further that the admissability of the complaint shall ordinarily be decided within twenty-one days from the date on which the complaint was received.
(4) Where a complaint is allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (3), the District Commission may proceed with the complaint in the manner provided under this Act.
Pecuniary Jurisdiction of Consumer Commissions:
On December 30, 2021, the Central Government notified Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021 in order to revise the pecuniary jurisdiction of District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission.
Jurisdiction of District Commission: The District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed fifty lakh rupees.
Jurisdiction of State Commission: The State Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds fifty lakh but does not exceed two crore rupees.
Jurisdiction of National Commission: The National Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds two crore rupees.
Modes of filing consumer cases:
a) Consumers can file cases physically in the respective commission by submitting complaint affidavit.
b) Government has recently introduced an alternative option to file cases online through portal https://edaakhil.nic.in/. Consumers may visit the portal for more information.
(1) A complaint in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or any service provided or agreed to be provided may be filed with a District Commission by -
(a) the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service provided or agreed to be provided;
(b) any organisation consumer association whether the consumer to whom the goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or service provided or agreed to be provided is a member of such association or not;
(c) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Commission on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested; or
(d) the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, either in its individual capacity or as a representative of interests of the consumers in general.
(2) Every complaint filed under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied with such amount of fee and payable in such manner as may be prescribed.
(3) On receipt of a complaint made under sub-section (1), the District Commission may, by order, allow the complaint to be proceeded with or rejected.
Provided that a complaint shall not be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity of being heard has been given to the complainant.
Provided further that the admissability of the complaint shall ordinarily be decided within twenty-one days from the date on which the complaint was received.
(4) Where a complaint is allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (3), the District Commission may proceed with the complaint in the manner provided under this Act.
Pecuniary Jurisdiction of Consumer Commissions:
On December 30, 2021, the Central Government notified Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021 in order to revise the pecuniary jurisdiction of District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission.
Jurisdiction of District Commission: The District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed fifty lakh rupees.
Jurisdiction of State Commission: The State Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds fifty lakh but does not exceed two crore rupees.
Jurisdiction of National Commission: The National Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds two crore rupees.
Modes of filing consumer cases:
a) Consumers can file cases physically in the respective commission by submitting complaint affidavit.
b) Government has recently introduced an alternative option to file cases online through portal https://edaakhil.nic.in/. Consumers may visit the portal for more information.
#6
Information about Consumer Protection Act 2019 / Consumer rights enhanced under...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 12, 2025, 02:49 PMThe Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (2019 Act) came into effect following Presidential assent and this Act repeals the previous Act of 1986 which was earlier amended from time-to-time to keep pace with the changing economic and consumer market scenario.
The new Act of 2019 has substantially enhanced the scope of protection afforded to consumers, by bringing within its purview complaints that may arise in the field of advertising and product liability and e-commerce.
Following new additions have been made in this Act.
The definition of "consumer" under the 2019 Act includes those who make purchases online. Endorsement of goods and services, normally done by celebrities, are also covered within the ambit of the 2019 Act. Apart from manufacturers and service providers, endorsers can also be made accountable, to prevent false or misleading advertisements.
The definition of "goods" has been amended to include "food" as defined in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. This would effectively bring food delivery platforms with the ambit of CPA 2019.
Telecom service has been added to the definition of "services" to bring telecom service providers within the purview of this Act.
Another significant addition to the Act is "product liability" whereby manufacturers and sellers of products or services have been made responsible to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by defective products, manufactured or sold, or for deficiency in services.
Another newly introduced dispute area is "unfair contracts", aimed to protect consumers from arbitrarily biased and unreasonable contracts which lean in favour of manufacturers or service providers.
The definition of "unfair trade practices" has been redefined to include misleading electronic advertising, refusing to take back or withdraw defective goods, or to withdraw or discontinue deficient services, and to refund the consideration within the period stipulated or in the absence of such stipulation, within a period of thirty days. It is now also an offence if any personal information, given in confidence and gathered in the course of a transaction, gets disclosed.
Another important amendment is the change in the jurisdiction to file complaints. Consumers can now institute a complaint at the District Consumer Court where the Complainant resides or personally works for gain. This will ease the burden on consumers who otherwise will be compelled to travel to other parts to pursue their complaints. This is in addition to the other avialable jurisdictions as per previous Act.
The new pecuniary jurisdiction for the Forums is as under:
1) Upto Rs.50 lakhs for District Commissions
2) More than Rs.50 lakhs upto Rs.2 crores for Statement Commissions
3) More than Rs.2 crores for National Commission
The new Act of 2019 has substantially enhanced the scope of protection afforded to consumers, by bringing within its purview complaints that may arise in the field of advertising and product liability and e-commerce.
Following new additions have been made in this Act.
The definition of "consumer" under the 2019 Act includes those who make purchases online. Endorsement of goods and services, normally done by celebrities, are also covered within the ambit of the 2019 Act. Apart from manufacturers and service providers, endorsers can also be made accountable, to prevent false or misleading advertisements.
The definition of "goods" has been amended to include "food" as defined in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. This would effectively bring food delivery platforms with the ambit of CPA 2019.
Telecom service has been added to the definition of "services" to bring telecom service providers within the purview of this Act.
Another significant addition to the Act is "product liability" whereby manufacturers and sellers of products or services have been made responsible to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by defective products, manufactured or sold, or for deficiency in services.
Another newly introduced dispute area is "unfair contracts", aimed to protect consumers from arbitrarily biased and unreasonable contracts which lean in favour of manufacturers or service providers.
The definition of "unfair trade practices" has been redefined to include misleading electronic advertising, refusing to take back or withdraw defective goods, or to withdraw or discontinue deficient services, and to refund the consideration within the period stipulated or in the absence of such stipulation, within a period of thirty days. It is now also an offence if any personal information, given in confidence and gathered in the course of a transaction, gets disclosed.
Another important amendment is the change in the jurisdiction to file complaints. Consumers can now institute a complaint at the District Consumer Court where the Complainant resides or personally works for gain. This will ease the burden on consumers who otherwise will be compelled to travel to other parts to pursue their complaints. This is in addition to the other avialable jurisdictions as per previous Act.
The new pecuniary jurisdiction for the Forums is as under:
1) Upto Rs.50 lakhs for District Commissions
2) More than Rs.50 lakhs upto Rs.2 crores for Statement Commissions
3) More than Rs.2 crores for National Commission
#7
Information about Consumer Protection Act 2019 / Important terms to know while ...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 12, 2025, 02:48 PMImportant terms and definitions in Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (repealed by Consumer Protection Act 2019)
A consumer can raise a valid consumer dispute when the goods purchased by him/her suffers defects and the services availed by him/her suffers from deficiencies. Let us see some of the important terms that a consumer needs to be aware of while raising a dispute.
Consumer: A Consumer is a person who purchases a product or avails a service for a consideration, either for his personal use or to earn his livelihood by means of self employment. The consideration may be:
Paid
Promised
Partly paid and partly promised.
It also includes a beneficiary of such goods/services when such use is made with the approval of such person.
Who is not a Consumer ?
A person is not a consumer if he/she:
-> purchases any goods or avails any service free of charge;
-> purchases a good or hires a service for commercial purpose;
-> avails any service under contract of service
Goods:
"Goods" means every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money, and includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land, which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of the sale.
Defect:
"Defect" means any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard which is required to be maintained by or under any law for time being in force or under any contract, express or implied, or as is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods.
Services:
"Service" means service of any description which is made available to potential users and include, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal services.
Contract of Service –It implies a relationship of a master and servant and involves to obey the order in the works to be performed and as to its mode and manner of performance. This does not come within the purview of CP Act.
Contract for Service – It implies a contract whereby one party undertakes to render services e.g., profession or technical services to or for another in the performance of which, he is not subject to detailed direction and control but exercises professional skills and uses his own knowledge and decisions.
Deficiency in Service: "Deficiency" means any fault, imperfection shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.
Unfair Trade Practice: An "unfair trade practice" means a trade practice, which, for the purpose of promoting any sale, use or supply of any goods or services, adopts unfair method, or unfair ordeceptive practice. Some of these practices include:
False Representation:
* When goods and services are not of stated standard, quality or grade;
* When second hand, renovated goods are sold as new ones;
* When goods and service do not have the claimed use, usefulness or benefit;
* When products / services do not have the claimed warranty / guarantee;
* When the price of product or service is misleading.
* False and Misleading Advertisement of selling at Bargain price.
* Offering gifts, prizes, etc. to lure customers with no intention of providing them.
Selling goods which do not fall within the safety standards set up by competent authority.
* Hoarding or destroying goods with the intention of raising the cost of these or similar goods manufactured in greater number so as to manipulate higher prices.
* Manufacturing or offering spurious goods or adopting deceptive practices in the provision of services.
Do you know?
"Goods once sold will not be taken back" or "No exchange", or "No refund under any circumstances" amount to Unfair Trade Practice and does not carry any legal weight.
Restrictive Trade Practice:
Manipulation of price or conditions of delivery or to affect flow of supplies in the market relating to goods or services in such a manner as to impose on the consumers unjustified costs or restrictions and shall include—
a) Delay beyond the period agreed to by a trader in supply of such goods or in providing the services which has led or is likely to lead to rise in the price;
b) Any trade practice which requires a consumer to buy, hire or avail of any goods or, as the case may be, services as condition precedent to buying, hiring or availing of other goods or services
A consumer can raise a valid consumer dispute when the goods purchased by him/her suffers defects and the services availed by him/her suffers from deficiencies. Let us see some of the important terms that a consumer needs to be aware of while raising a dispute.
Consumer: A Consumer is a person who purchases a product or avails a service for a consideration, either for his personal use or to earn his livelihood by means of self employment. The consideration may be:
Paid
Promised
Partly paid and partly promised.
It also includes a beneficiary of such goods/services when such use is made with the approval of such person.
Who is not a Consumer ?
A person is not a consumer if he/she:
-> purchases any goods or avails any service free of charge;
-> purchases a good or hires a service for commercial purpose;
-> avails any service under contract of service
Goods:
"Goods" means every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money, and includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land, which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of the sale.
Defect:
"Defect" means any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard which is required to be maintained by or under any law for time being in force or under any contract, express or implied, or as is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods.
Services:
"Service" means service of any description which is made available to potential users and include, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal services.
Contract of Service –It implies a relationship of a master and servant and involves to obey the order in the works to be performed and as to its mode and manner of performance. This does not come within the purview of CP Act.
Contract for Service – It implies a contract whereby one party undertakes to render services e.g., profession or technical services to or for another in the performance of which, he is not subject to detailed direction and control but exercises professional skills and uses his own knowledge and decisions.
Deficiency in Service: "Deficiency" means any fault, imperfection shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.
Unfair Trade Practice: An "unfair trade practice" means a trade practice, which, for the purpose of promoting any sale, use or supply of any goods or services, adopts unfair method, or unfair ordeceptive practice. Some of these practices include:
False Representation:
* When goods and services are not of stated standard, quality or grade;
* When second hand, renovated goods are sold as new ones;
* When goods and service do not have the claimed use, usefulness or benefit;
* When products / services do not have the claimed warranty / guarantee;
* When the price of product or service is misleading.
* False and Misleading Advertisement of selling at Bargain price.
* Offering gifts, prizes, etc. to lure customers with no intention of providing them.
Selling goods which do not fall within the safety standards set up by competent authority.
* Hoarding or destroying goods with the intention of raising the cost of these or similar goods manufactured in greater number so as to manipulate higher prices.
* Manufacturing or offering spurious goods or adopting deceptive practices in the provision of services.
Do you know?
"Goods once sold will not be taken back" or "No exchange", or "No refund under any circumstances" amount to Unfair Trade Practice and does not carry any legal weight.
Restrictive Trade Practice:
Manipulation of price or conditions of delivery or to affect flow of supplies in the market relating to goods or services in such a manner as to impose on the consumers unjustified costs or restrictions and shall include—
a) Delay beyond the period agreed to by a trader in supply of such goods or in providing the services which has led or is likely to lead to rise in the price;
b) Any trade practice which requires a consumer to buy, hire or avail of any goods or, as the case may be, services as condition precedent to buying, hiring or availing of other goods or services
#8
Information about Consumer Protection Act 2019 / When and where to file a consu...
Last post by icf-com - Feb 12, 2025, 02:47 PMWho can file a Complaint?
a) Any consumer;
b) Any voluntary consumer association;
c) Central Government or any State Government;
d) One or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having same interest
e) In case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative
Note: A beneficiary of goods/services when such use is made with the
approval of the person who purchased or availed goods and services.
When can complaint be made?
A complaint may be made in writing under the following circumstances:
1) loss or damage is caused to the consumer due to unfair or restrictive trade practice of a trader or service provider;
2) the article purchased by a consumer is defective;
3) the services availed of by a consumer suffer from any deficiency;
4) when a trader or service provider, as the case may be, has charged for the goods or for the service mentioned in the complaint a price in excess of the stipulated price;
5) Goods or services, which will be hazardous to life and safety, when used, are being offered for sale to the public
Where to file a Complaint?
As per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 a complaint can be filed in:
a) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF): If the value of the
claim is upto Rupees 50 lakhs. With the recent amendment (2019), the nomenclature of DCDRF has changed to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
b) State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC): If the value
of the claim exceeds Rupees 50 lakhs but is within Rupees two crores.
c) National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) If the
value of the claim exceeds Rupees two crores.
I. District Commission:
Each District has a District Commission consisting of three members. Out of the three, one is President, who is or has been or is qualified to be a District Judge. One of the members shall be a woman.
It entertains complaints where the value of claim is up to Rupees 50 Lakhs.
II State Commission:
• Each state has one State Commission.
• It consists of a President, who is or has been a Judge of a High Court and two other members, one of whom shall be a woman.
• Complaints can be filed in State Commission where the value of claim is above Rupees 50 Lakhs upto Rupees two(2) crores.
• Appeals against the Orders of the District Forums can also be filed in the State Commission.
III National Commission:
• The National Commission is located in Delhi.
• It consists of a President who is or has been a Judge of the Supreme Court and not less than four other members, one of whom shall be a woman.
• Complaints for value of claim exceeding rupees two (2) crores can be filed in the National Commission.
• It takes appeals against Orders passed by the State Commissions.
• The Orders of this Commission can only be challenged in the Supreme Court.
a) Any consumer;
b) Any voluntary consumer association;
c) Central Government or any State Government;
d) One or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having same interest
e) In case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative
Note: A beneficiary of goods/services when such use is made with the
approval of the person who purchased or availed goods and services.
When can complaint be made?
A complaint may be made in writing under the following circumstances:
1) loss or damage is caused to the consumer due to unfair or restrictive trade practice of a trader or service provider;
2) the article purchased by a consumer is defective;
3) the services availed of by a consumer suffer from any deficiency;
4) when a trader or service provider, as the case may be, has charged for the goods or for the service mentioned in the complaint a price in excess of the stipulated price;
5) Goods or services, which will be hazardous to life and safety, when used, are being offered for sale to the public
Where to file a Complaint?
As per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 a complaint can be filed in:
a) District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF): If the value of the
claim is upto Rupees 50 lakhs. With the recent amendment (2019), the nomenclature of DCDRF has changed to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
b) State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC): If the value
of the claim exceeds Rupees 50 lakhs but is within Rupees two crores.
c) National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) If the
value of the claim exceeds Rupees two crores.
I. District Commission:
Each District has a District Commission consisting of three members. Out of the three, one is President, who is or has been or is qualified to be a District Judge. One of the members shall be a woman.
It entertains complaints where the value of claim is up to Rupees 50 Lakhs.
II State Commission:
• Each state has one State Commission.
• It consists of a President, who is or has been a Judge of a High Court and two other members, one of whom shall be a woman.
• Complaints can be filed in State Commission where the value of claim is above Rupees 50 Lakhs upto Rupees two(2) crores.
• Appeals against the Orders of the District Forums can also be filed in the State Commission.
III National Commission:
• The National Commission is located in Delhi.
• It consists of a President who is or has been a Judge of the Supreme Court and not less than four other members, one of whom shall be a woman.
• Complaints for value of claim exceeding rupees two (2) crores can be filed in the National Commission.
• It takes appeals against Orders passed by the State Commissions.
• The Orders of this Commission can only be challenged in the Supreme Court.
#9
Online Shopping / Order cancelled - non refund o...
Last post by hanumat_pr - Feb 11, 2025, 04:36 PMI have order for Countur plus Elite glucometer with Free 25 strips, order id : 3xxxxx4 dt: 01.2.2025, for Rs.680/- prepaid, on the same day I have cancelled order, they have despatched this product on 03.02.2025 through bluedart courier, I have refuse it. Beato customer care people repeatedly say to me, Rs. 680 /- refund initiated on 01.02.2025, it is credited with 5 to 7 days, and they have not given any updates are not mentioned in their website in my account. I have attached screen shots for your condisderation. Please do the needful at the earliest.
Value: 680
Value: 680
#10
General Discussion / Welcome to SMF!
Last post by Simple Machines - Feb 11, 2025, 03:06 PMWelcome to Simple Machines Forum!
We hope you enjoy using your forum. If you have any problems, please feel free to ask us for assistance.
Thanks!
Simple Machines
We hope you enjoy using your forum. If you have any problems, please feel free to ask us for assistance.
Thanks!
Simple Machines
Pages1