CONSUMER PROTECTION

Revamp consumer protection laws

THE CONSUMER movement is in its nascent stage in our country and must therefore be nurtured with due care and protected from the evils of the notorious court culture. It is imperative that the consumer laws should be oriented towards consumer interests. Consumer problems mostly emanate from the tardy working of the consumer courts. Unfortunately, these laws comprising the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 followed by Amendment Acts 1991, 1993 and more recently 2002 have done nothing to insulate the consumer courts established under them from the old-time law court culture of tardy working, delays, dilatory tactics, adjournments and postponements on flimsy grounds and technicalities, bribery, underhand dealings, presence of advocates and other malpractices.

It was expected that this statute would meet the challenges of a vastly different nature in a rapidly changing social order that yearns to replace the dictum "beware consumer" with "consumer is king" both in theory and practice. However, just the opposite has been achieved. The consumer courts have adopted the same work culture and ethos that prevail in other law courts in the country. Ironically, the government, which attaches much vocal importance to consumer protection, enacted Amendment Acts that have made the laws still more consumer-hostile than before.

Penalties clause

The lawmakers conveniently forgot that this legislation is of far reaching ramifications for the simple reason that everybody is a consumer and the common man by and large is litigation-shy. He knocks the doors of justice as a last resort and prefers to suffer in silence unless the stakes for him are very high indeed. Apart from money, the time, energy and patience required to pursue a case are other great inhibiting factors. The Amendment Act 2002 makes the benefits of the legislation costlier by prescribing a court fee for filing a complaint (previously there was no court fee or stamp duty to be paid). A complaint may be dismissed if the complainant even once fails to appear before the court on the date of hearing. What, however, takes the cake is an amendment in section 27— the Penalties clause. It puts the aggrieved complainant on the same footing as his tormentor so far as imposing of penalties is concerned. If not for ushering in a new social order to stall an indomitable and unscrupulously penetrating phenomenon of abuse of consumers, to what else, one wonders, the legislation should address itself?

A pigmy Mr. Consumer is pitted against the unscrupulous corporate giants — "Dons," "Sharks" and "Kings" of industries both in the public and private sectors joined by equally unscrupulous advertisers, chain of retailers, traders and salesmen and now to cap it all are the laws that choose not to recognise the fact that single-handedly he is not fighting for the redress of his own grievances alone but in the process also espousing a laudable social cause and, therefore, his interests need to be protected in the larger interests of society as a whole. By fighting for his rights, he is also enriching society and the nation.

Canons of natural justice demand that an aggrieved complainant who takes pains to agitate the law for the redress of his grievances against such a formidable combination should be afforded all possible help and consideration in securing justice. Instead, each successive amendment makes his task still more inhibitive. The consumer protection laws are now more retrograde and intricate. They defeat the very purpose i.e. "consumer protection" for which they were brought on the statute book.

Presence of lawyers

Further most of the maladies arise due to the presence of advocates and lawyers in the consumer courts. This institution should have no place in the administration of justice in consumer disputes just as it has no place in Family courts. Even an illiterate consumer can protect his interests provided the laws are made less intricate and the procedure simple, economical and hassle-free. The advocates and the lawyers should be barred from presenting and arguing the cases involving consumer grievances. The proceedings under the Act should be oriented differently quite distinct from those of civil or criminal courts if at all we are interested in reforming the consumer justice delivery system. In due course a different free-from-corruption-and-malpractices consumer court culture will evolve provided the consumer protection laws are revamped and fresh consumer-friendly legislation is immediately brought about with a view to effecting the much needed change in consumer justice administration and delivery system.

SANJOG MAHESHWARI