CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT
• DEFECT IN GOOD/SERVICES
• Under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a complaint can be filed when a
consumer detects deficient in a service. However, the threshold of deficiency
must fall under the ambit of the definition of deficiency given under the
Consumer Protection At, 2019. The consumer Protection Act, 2019 came
into effect on July 20, 2020. The Consumer Protection Act 2019 not only
recognizes physical relationship of buyer-seller but also has acknowledged
services pertaining to e-commerce platforms. The aim of both new and old
Consumer Protection Act is to protect and safeguard the interest of
consumers.
• Definition of Deficiency of Service
• Section 2 (11) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 defines Deficiency of
Service as “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 the 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 and includes (a) any act of negligence or
omission or commission by such person to the consumer and (b) deliberate
withholding of relevant information by such person to the consumer.”
• The term ‘defect’ is defined under Section 2 (10) of
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as “any fault, imperfection
or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or
standard which is required to be maintained by or under and
law for the 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 or products and
the expression ‘defective’ shall be construed accordingly.”
• In any buyer-seller relationship, deficiency of service
prevails. Such as legal aid, banks, railways, construction,
transportation, education, electricity, entertainment,
restaurant, hospitality, etc. The consequences of deficiency
of service can range from inconvenience or harassment to
mental or physical injury to death, thereby leading to legal
consequences.
• Indian Medical Association v V.P. Shanth
• This case is a result of medical negligence from medical profession. This landmark
decision recognized patient’s rights through giving them the consumer status where
complaints could be lodged in a case of deficiency in the field of medical services
under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The liability of doctor and hospital
management arises when a patient is admitted. The standard duty of care must be
maintained by the hospital. When a patient is admitted, he/she is also considered as a
consumer. 
•  The Supreme Court emphasized on the interest and safeguards of patients which is
given the upmost importance.
• In the case of Om Prakash v Reliance Genral Insurance, where the insurance
company declines the insurance of the complainant on the basis of delaying in
intimating the insurance company. However, in the case of Gurshinder Singh v
Shriam General Insurance Co. Ltd and Ors, it was ruled that with a reasonable and
satisfactory explanation, insurance claims were not to be declined due to technical
grounds. It was further opined by the Court that if the insurance claim is declined by
the Insurer because of untimely intimation of occurrence of theft/robbery, it would be
considered as a technical ground of rejection and the same would be unjust and not fair,
if the respective claim in question has already been verified. Hence, it was held by the
Court that, mere delay in intimating the insurance company about the theft must not act
as a valid ground to decline or repudiate the insurance claim, which has already been
proved to be genuine.
• Laws governing the food industry:
• The Indian food processing industry is regulated by several laws which govern the aspects of
sanitation, licensing and other necessary permits that are required to start up and run a food
business. The legislation that dealt with food safety in India was the Prevention of Food
Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "PFA"). The PFA had been in place for over five
decades and there was a need for change due to varied reasons which include the changing
requirements of our food industry.
• The act brought into force in place of the PFA is the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
(hereinafter referred to as "FSSA") that overrides all other food related laws. It specifically repealed
eight laws which were in operation prior to the enforcement of FSSA:
• The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954
• The Fruit Products Order, 1955
• The Meat Food Products Order, 1973
• The Vegetable Oil Products (Control) Order, 1947
• The Edible Oils Packaging (Regulation) Order, 1998
• The Solvent Extracted Oil, De oiled Meal, and Edible Flour (Control) Order, 1967
• The Milk and Milk Products Order, 1992
• Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in relation to food)
• Need for the new act:
• FSSA initiates harmonization of India's food regulations as per international standards. It
establishes a new national regulatory body, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India
(hereinafter referred to as "FSSAI"), to develop science based standards for food and to regulate
and monitor the manufacture, processing, storage, distribution, sale and import of food so as to
ensure the availability of safe and wholesome food for human consumption. All food imports will
therefore be subject to the provisions of the FSSA and rules and regulations which as notified by
the Government on 5th of August 2011 will be applicable.
• BIS AND AGMARK
• Certification marks
• The state enforced certification marks presently in India are (alphabetical list):
• Agmark for all agricultural products.
• BIS hallmark: certifies the purity of gold jewellery.
• Ecomark is an ecolabel for various products issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards. Voluntary and
promotional.
• FPO mark. A mandatory mark for all processed fruit products in India. Certifies that the product was
manufactured in a hygienic 'food-safe' environment.
• Geographical Indications marks, defined under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS), have been in force since 2003. Examples, include the Darjeeling tea and Basmati mark.[4]
• India Organic certification mark for organically farmed food products.[5] Certifies that the product conforms to
the specifications of National Standards for Organic Products, 2000[6] and any eventual amendments. The
certification is issued by testing centres accredited by the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export
Development Authority (APEDA) under the National Program for Organic Production of the Government of India.
• ISI mark. For industrial product. Certifies that a product confirms to a set of standards laid by the Bureau of
Indian Standards.[7]
• Non Polluting Vehicle mark on motor vehicles certifying conformity to the Bharat Stage emission standards.
• FSSAI for all food products.
• AGMARK is a certification mark employed on agricultural products in India, assuring that they conform to a set of
standards approved by the Directorate of Marketing and Inspection an attached Office of the Department of
Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare under Ministry of Agricultural & Farmers Welfare an agency of the
Government of India
• Responsibility for Proper Management of Harmful and Other Wastes
• According to Section 4 of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and
Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, these are the process that needs to be followed
by various people for proper management of Hazardous Waste:
• Occupier:
• They should pursue anticipation, minimization, reuse, recycle, recuperation, utilisation
including co-handling; safe disposal
• They ought to have a safe and environmentally sound management of harmful waste.
• An authorized user will receive the harmful waste created in an establishment or it will be
discarded according to the authorised disposal facility.
• In accordance with the guidelines laid down, the occupier’s establishment will transport
the waste produced to an authorised actual user or to an authorised facility.
• Storage and removal facility will be provided to the operator of that facility with such
explicit data as may be required for safe storing and disposal as may be required by those
who expect to get harmful waste treated and disposed of by the administrator.
• They will take all the steps while managing hazardous waste to-
• Provide people working on-site with appropriate training, equipment and the information
necessary to ensure their safety.
• Contain contaminants and anticipate accidents and confine their consequences on
human beings and the environment.
 Deficiency in Service - Essential Elements
• The present article deals with the concept of Deficiency in Service under the
gamut of Consumer Protection Laws in India along with a case study dealing
with deficiency aspects in banking services. Before explaining the concept of
deficiency in service it is essential to understand what is meant by service.

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, the 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.

The expression contract of personal service is not defined under the Act. In

common parlance, it means - a contract to render service in a private capacity to
an individual. For example, where a servant enters into an agreement with a
master for employment, or where a landlord agrees to supply water to his
tenant, these are the contracts of personal service. The idea is that under a
personal service relationship, a person can discontinue the service at any time
according to his will and he need not approach Consumer Forum to complain
about deficiency in service.
•
There is a difference between contract of personal service and contract for
personal service.

In the case of contract of personal service, the service seeker can order or require
what is to be done and how it should be done. Like a master can tell his servant to
bring goods from a particular place. But in a contract for personal service, the
service seeker can tell only what is to be done. How the work will be done is at the
wish of the performer. Like when a person gives a suit to the tailor for stitching, he
does not tell him which method he should use to stitch it.

It does not make a difference whether the service provider is a Government body or a
Private body. Thus even if a statutory corporation provides a deficient service, it can
be made liable under the Act.

The definition provides a list of eleven sectors to which service may pertain in order to
come under the purview of the Act. The list of these sectors is not an exhaustive one.

Service may be of any description and pertain to any sector if it satisfies the following criteria:
1.service is made available to the potential users, i.e., service not only to the actual users
but also to those who are capable of using it.
2.it should not be free of charge, e.g., the medical service rendered free of charge in
Government hospital is not a service under the Act;
3.it should not be under a contract of personal 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. The deficiency must be in relation to service - The words ‘....in relation to
any service' in the definition signifies that the deficiency is always in terms of service. Thus if the
grievance pertains to a matter which does not fall in the definition of service, the concept of
deficiency would not apply.

In the normal course, if the service is found deficient as per the above criteria, it is held deficient and
the compensation is awarded. However, there may be abnormal circumstances beyond the control
of the person performing service. If such circumstances prevent a person from rendering service of
the desired quality, nature and manner, such person should not be penalized for the same.

For instance: A agreed to supply water to B for irrigation of crops. He failed to do so because of a

power breakdown due to the burning of a transformer. As a result crop damaged. B sued A for
providing deficient service. The National Commission held that it was duty of A to get the
transformer repaired immediately. Since he was negligent in doing so, he is liable for the deficiency
in service - Orissa Lift Irrigation Corpn. Ltd. v. Birakishore Raut [1991] 2 CPJ 213 (NC).

The distinction between a deficiency in service and negligence is brought out in the case of Ravneet
Singh Bagga vs. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines - 2000 (1) SCC 66. The deficiency in service cannot be
alleged without attributing fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature, and
manner of performance which is required to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or
otherwise in relation to any service.

The burden of proving the deficiency in service is upon the person who alleges it. The complainant
has, on facts, been found to have not established any willful fault, imperfection, shortcoming or
inadequacy in the service of the respondent
• The deficiency in service has to be distinguished from the tortuous
acts of the respondent. In the absence of deficiency in service the
aggrieved person may have a remedy under the common law to file
a suit for damages but cannot insist for grant of relief under the Act
for the alleged acts of commission and omission attributable to the
respondent which otherwise do not amount to deficiency in service.
If on facts it is found that the person or authority rendering service
had taken all precautions and considered all relevant facts and
circumstances in the course of the transaction and that their action
or the final decision was in good faith, it cannot be said that there
had been any deficiency in service.

If the action of the respondent is found to be in good faith, there is

no deficiency of service entitling the aggrieved person to claim relief
under the Act. The rendering of deficient service has to be
considered and decided in each case according to the facts of that
case for which no hard and fast rule can be laid down. Inefficiency,
lack of due care, absence of bonafide, rashness, haste or omission
and the like may be the factors to ascertain the deficiency in
rendering the service.
• Recent case laws related to deficiency in services
• 1. Gurshinder Singh v. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. (2020)
• In this case, the appellant had got his tractor insured with the respondent. Later, the
tractor was stolen and an FIR was lodged on the same day. However, the claim was
submitted to the respondent. It was rejected on the ground that intimation was
given after a delay of 52 days. The appellant filed a consumer complaint before the
District Consumer Forum. Furthermore, on appeal, the Supreme Court held that if
there is a mere delay by a person in intimating the insurance company about the
theft, this cannot be the ground to repudiate an insurance claim. 
• 2. Amitabh Dasgupta v. United Bank of India
• The case had gone into appeal. The appellant’s mother took a locker on rent in the
Deshapriya Park, Kolkata Branch of the respondent bank. The appellant/complainant
was included as a joint holder of the locker. The appellant visited the respondent
bank to operate the locker and deposit the locker rent. However, the appellant was
informed that the bank had broken open his locker for non-payment of rent dues.
Further, that the locker had subsequently been reallocated to another customer.
When the appellant went to collect the contents of the locker, he found only two of
the seven ornaments that had been deposited in the locker in a non-sealed envelope.
However, the respondent bank contended that only those two ornaments were found
in the appellant’s locker when it was broken open. That the same is evident from the
inventory prepared by the respondent. When the locker was broken open in the
presence of an independent witness. Subsequently, the appellant filed a consumer
complaint before the District Consumer Forum. Furthermore, on appeal, the Supreme
Court issued guidelines on allotting and operating of lockers and the court held that
banks will be liable under the Consumer Protection Act for deficiencies in locker
services.
ENFORCEMENT OF CONSUMER
RIGHTS
• Anybody who uses certain goods or services, for self-consumption, is a consumer.
“Consumers” does not include, anyone who avails of goods or service free of charge,
purchases for commercial purposes, or someone who avails of service as an
employer under a contract of service. With the developing technology platforms,
and various sources of supply, consumers are relying more on e-commerce and
digitalization. The ever-increasing demands and options have opened gates to
frauds, unfair trade practices, and deficiency of services to the consumers. Thus, to
safeguard the consumers against such acts, certain laws were formulated by the
government. Out of these, one crucial Act to protect the interest of innocent
consumers is the “Consumer Protection Act, 1986”. This Act did not include the
transactions related to e-commerce but owing to the growth of these platforms, the
new Act i.e. the consumer protection Act of 2019 was formulated which came into
force on 20th July, 2020.

• Section 10 of the new Act provides authority to the Central Government to

incorporate the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) which aims to
protect the consumers from fraud, unfair trade practices, misleading advertisements
and violation of their rights as a consumer. CCPA can take cognizance of a consumer
complaint either on its own i.e. suo moto, or when directed by the central
government or on the receipt of consumer complaint by CCPA.
• Consumer Redressal Forums
• Jurisdiction
• The consumer protection act, 2019 replaced the Act of 1986 to adapt to the changing
environment. The new Act includes, in its ambit, e-commerce transactions. The act has also
modified the definition of the complainant to include a parent or legal guardian in case the
complainant is a minor.
• Certain significant amendments have been brought by the 2019 Act, with respect to the 
Consumer Redressal Forums, also. These are:-
1.Territorial Jurisdiction – The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 now provides that the
consumers can register their complaints at a place where all or one of the opposite parties
resides or carries on business, or the place of cause of action or where the complainant is
residing or works for gain unlike the 1986 Act (which mandated filing of a complaint by the
complainant at a place of residence or business of the respondent only), thus increasing the
scope of territorial jurisdiction. The ultimate objective behind this is to remove the difficulties
and problems faced by the consumers in seeking redressal against businesses.
• The complaints are registered at appropriate forums based on the limit of pecuniary
jurisdiction.
2.Pecuniary Jurisdiction – Certain significant modifications have been brought forth by the
Act of 2019 concerning the pecuniary jurisdiction for all the forums i.e. the District, State,
and National Commissions, respectively:
3.The upper limit of pecuniary jurisdiction for the District Commission has been increased from
Rs.20, LAKHS to Rs.1 CR as per Section 34, Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
4.The limit of pecuniary jurisdiction for the State Commission  has been increased from Rs.20
LAKHS TO 1CR to Rs.1CR 10CR as per Section 47, Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and,
5.The limit of pecuniary jurisdiction for the National Commission has been increased from
above Rs.1CR to above Rs.10CR and aboveas per Section 58, Consumer Protection Act,
2019.
• These modifications have widened the scope of pecuniary jurisdiction to a much
larger extent. Along with the above-mentioned changes, the 2019 Act has also
changed the means for the determination of the pecuniary jurisdiction on the basis
of the valuation of goods and services payable as consideration, unlike the 1986
Act where, pecuniary jurisdiction was determined by the value of the goods and
services as well as the compensation sought, therefore not escalating the amount
of compensation claimed to bring the complaint within the pecuniary jurisdiction of
State or National Commission.
• For determining the value of the complaint, the aggregate value of the goods or
services and compensation claimed by the complainant. This was held in the case
of “M/s Pyaridevi Chabiraj Steels Pvt. Ltd. v. National Insurance Corporation Ltd.
3.Alternate Dispute Resolution– Another crucial redressal mechanism
incorporated by the 2019 Act, is the alternate dispute resolution in the form of
mediation. This is done to ensure speedy resolution of disputes and is less
expensive. As per the 2019 Act, the complaint may be referred to mediation after
the admission of the complaint or at the first hearing or at any time before the
dispute is resolved. The forum shall refer the matter to mediation with the written
consent of both the parties, furnished within 5 days. 
• To this effect, the new act incorporates the establishment of a consumer mediation
cell by the respective State Government in each district and state as well as at the
national commission by the central government and be attached to the forums.
• It is based on the principles of natural justice.
4.E-Complaints– The 2019 Act also includes the filing of Complaints before the
District Forums electronically. The rules regarding this are yet to be prescribed by
the Government. This was done to tackle problems related to the increase in
digitalisation.
•Composition
1.District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum
•Each district forum would comprise of:
1.A President who is qualified, or has been qualified, to be a district judge, and
2.Two other members, having ability, integrity and standing and possess knowledge and experience in dealing
with problems related to economics, law, commerce etc. and one of whom shall be a woman.
3.State Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum
•The state consumer dispute redressal forum, established in each state, should comprise of:
1.A president, who is or a person who has been a Judge of a High Court and is appointed by the government of
the respective state. These appointments are made only after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High
Court, and
2.Two other members have ability, integrity and standing and also possess knowledge and experience in dealing
with problems related to economics, law, commerce, public affairs, administration, etc. and one of whom shall
be a woman. These appointments, as mentioned, shall be mandatorily made only after consultation and
recommendation of a selection committee comprising of:
3.President of the state commission,
4.Secretary of the law department of the State, 
5.Secretary in charge of the department dealing with consumer affairs in the respective state.
6.Nation Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum
• Over and above the state consumer forum, lies the national consumer dispute redressal forum. As per the Act,
the forum shall comprise of:
1.A president appointed by the central government, who is a judge or has been a judge of the Supreme court
and these appointments are to be mandatorily made after consulting the Chief Justice of India.
2.Four other members have the ability, integrity and standing and also possess knowledge and experience in
dealing with problems related to economics, law, commerce, public affairs, administration, etc. and one of
whom shall be a woman. 
•The act provides that these appointments are to be made by the Central government on the recommendation
of a selection committee constituting of:
1.A person who is a judge of the Supreme Court to be nominated by the chief justice of India.
2.The secretary in the Department of legal affairs in the government of India.
3.Secretary of the Department dealing with consumer affairs in the Government of India.