Caveat Emptor or Caveat Venditor?

In simple words Caveat Emptor means “let the buyer beware”.

Emptor in Latin is the buyer and the verb cavere is a verb of
caution: caveat emptor was the perfect principle for
transactions involving not massive quantity of goods. In
commercial transaction it is the duty of every buyer to be
careful while buying goods of his or her requirements and also
the seller is under an obligation to allow the buyer to examine
the goods prior to entering into contract.
The principle of Caveat emptor is explained in Section 16 of
the Sale of Goods Act 1930 which states that the buyer should
inspect the goods to his best knowledge as there is no implied
condition or warranty as to quality or fitness for any particular
purpose of goods supplied.
When the rule of caveat emptor originated, it was quite rigid
and there was no scope for any subsequent change in the rule.
Concepts like ‘fitness of goods’ and ‘merchantability’, which
could be used to shift the burden as to quality and fitness on
the seller, were not encouraged The seller had absolutely no
responsibility and hence there was a gradual shift towards the
Doctrine of Caveat venditor which means “Let the seller
beware”.
Whenever the seller is about to sell any goods to the buyer
then the seller must be aware about the buyer in respect of to
the usage of the goods the address of the buyer the name,
occupation etc. In the case of Rekha Sahu v UCO Bank and
others it was held that when the rule of caveat emptor (buyer
beware) prevails, it is for the purchaser to either verify the title
before purchasing the property or invite complication through
litigation. However, now the rule of caveat emptor is replaced
by caveat venditor (seller beware) and when the Bank/Financial
Institution put the property on sale, they must show clear title to
the said property.
This also put an obligation on the seller to make proper
disclosures to the best of his knowledge. There must be no
misrepresentations on the usability or purpose of the product
sold. The defects, if any, should be disclosed. Therefore, the
seller’s duty to make the buyer aware of all the defects in the
goods being sold and all the information relating to the usage of
the goods. This obligation of the seller should be irrespective of
his own knowledge and skill, because what matters is not what
he has but what he is expected to have.

In India, the new Consumer Protection Act was passed by the

parliament in 2019 and it came into effect recently on 20th July
2020. The Act has replaced the 1986 Act which was obsolete
with regards to the modern consumer problems. This Act is in
favour of the Doctrine of Caveat Venditor and ensures the
empowerment of consumers by means such as expanding the
scope of grievances eligible for redressal- consumers can
complain and be compensated not just for defective goods and
deficient services but also for unfair contract terms, spurious
goods as well as false and misleading advertises. The act also
provides for filing of complaints electronically.

Conclusion:
With the boom in e-commerce industry and capitalism, it is a
given that there will be exploitation of consumers. This Act
provides a security blanket to consumers, however a balance of
both the doctrines should be maintained for a smooth flow of
transactions. Consumers must research about the products
being used, the companies which manufacture them, etc. At the
same time it is the obligation of sellers and vendors to be as
transparent as possible about the goods sold and services they
provide.