ISSN 0975-9700

(Vol. No. XIV Issue 1)

January 2021 – June 2021
Chair on Consumer Law and Practice Ministry of Consumer Affairs,

National Law School of India University, Food & Public Distribution,

Department of Consumer Affairs,
Bengaluru, Karnataka.
Government of India, New Delhi.

CONTENTS Right To
Healthy
Environment

From the Editorial Board 1

Ac vi es of the Chair 2

Updates on Consumer Law Cases 8

Legisla on Update! 24

Web Alert! 25

Books & Ar cles Alert! 27

Call for papers Interna onal Journal on

Consumer Law and Prac ce (IJCLP) 29

Post Graduate Diploma Course in

Consumer Law & Prac ce (PGDCLP) 31

CHIEF EDITOR
Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil
Chair Professor, Chair on Consumer Law & Practice
NLSIU
EDITOR CO-EDITOR
Mr. Akshay Baburao Yadav Ms.Vasavi Hegde
Teaching Associate Research Associate
NLSIU CLAP, NLSIU

For Citation: March of Consumer Law and Practice, NLSIU, 2021, (Vol. No. XIV Issue No.1)
 Resource person for Refresher Course in Law & Human Rights on topic “Consumer & Human Rights” organized by UGC-Human Resource
Development Centre & University Law College, Bangalore University, Bangalore held on 05th January, 2021.

Invited as chief guest to deliver a valedictory address for the a endees
of the Interna onal Media on Training Program, organized by Jagran
Lakecity University, School of Law, Centre for Interna onal Commercial
Arbitra on and Alternate Dispute Resolu on in associa on with the
Indian Ins tute of Arbitra on & Media on (IIAM) and Na onal Law
Ins tute University, Bhopal (NLIU) held on 16th January 2021.
Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, par cipated in a Virtual NGO Roundtable
Conference on 'Strengthening and safeguarding consumer trust and
rights' hosted by Amazon involving representa ves from Amazon,
Civil Society Partners, Community Advocates & Academia held
on 10th February 2021.

Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, par cipated & expressed his views in Online Stakeholders Consulta on on Pecuniary Jurisdic on of the Consumer
Commissions, organized by the Department of Consumer Affairs, GoI in associa on with the Centre for Consumer Studies, IIPA, welcome
address by Prof. Suresh Misra, Chair-Professor (Consumer Affairs) & Coordinator, CCS, IIPA Introductory remarks by Ms. Nidhi Khare,
Addl Secretary (CA),DoCA, GoI, Inaugural Address by Ms. Leena Nandan, Secretary, DoCA, GoI held on 01st February, 2021.

Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, had a mee ng & discussion on Na onal & Interna onal report on “Consumer Protec on Law in Asia”
comments on general conclusions, Interna onal percep ve and comments on how na onal law has been represented
which has to be finally published in Cambridge University Press book, organized by Hong Kong University, held on 03rd February,
2021 & 04th February, 2021.
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU

FROM THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Dear Readers,
A cordial welcome!
With absolute pleasure and honour, we present the XIV Volume Issue 1 of
the March of Consumer Law and Practice, January-June 2021 Magazine on
behalf of the Chair on Consumer Law and Practice and Mediation Centre,
NLSIU. This booklet covers the activities of the Chair on Consumer Law and
Practice (CLAP), update on latest Judicial Pronouncements, Legislationsand relevant literature in the
Consumer Law during the period of January 2021-June 2021. It also throws some light upon one Consumer
friendly Website established by Government of India where consumers can report their grievance
easily.
The current situation of pandemic has changed the traditional dimension of the consumer behaviour.
Due to Covid-19 norms like restriction on movement of public and closure of offline markets, E-Commerce
business boomed in the country. Also, these are the factors which have put the consumers and their
rights at stake. As the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution has enacted
E-Commerce Rules, 2020 by virtue of the powers conferred by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the
issue is getting resolved effectively ever like before. Another important initiative taken by the Ministry
of Consumer Affairs is to adding surgical and N95 masks and hand sanitizers to the list of essential
commodities under Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (ECA)from March 2020 to June 2020. This step
enabled the consumers/citizens of India to get the Mask and Hand sanitizers even during lockdown,
thereby they could follow the Covid-19 standards effectively.
The March of Consumer Law and Practice has maintained a legacy of spreading awareness about such
legal steps taken by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution. The very objective
of this magazine is to create and widen the awareness among the consumers, students, academicians,
professionals, government officials, NGOs and general public and other stake holders of the society.
We are certain that this magazine could be preserved in order to get any legal reference. We
wholeheartedly welcome positive suggestions, constructive criticism to develop the magazine in future.
I thank CLAP team members for their relentless ventures to bring this Newsletter. I would also like to
extend my sincere thanks to our University and Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government of India,
New Delhi for their constant support for our entire activities.
Happy Reading!

Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil

Professor of Law &
Chair Professor, Chair on Consumer Law & Practice
National Law School of India University
Nagarbhavi, Bengaluru-560072, Karnataka, India

Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 1
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
ACTIVITIES OF THE
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE & MEDIATION CENTRE
PROF. (DR.) ASHOK R. PATIL, CHAIR PROFESSOR
NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA, INDIA
ACTIVITIES FROM JANUARY 2021 – JUNE 2021
I. Seminars/Conference/Workshop organized:
1. Law Enforcers Training Workshop on
“Implementation of the Prohibition of
Electronic Cigarettes (Production,
Manufacture, Import, Export, Transport,
Sale, Distribution, Storage and
Advertisement) Act, 2019” was organised
by Chair on Consumer Law & Practice,
National Law School of India University
(NLSIU), Bangalore in association with
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK), on
6th May, 2021. II.
2. National Webinar on “Misleading
Advertisement under The Consumer
Protection Act, 2019” was organised by
Chair on Consumer Law & Practice, National
Law School of India University (NLSIU),
Bangalore, on 15 th March, 2021,
inaugurated by Ms. Nidhi Khare, Chief
Commissioner, Central Consumer Protection
Authority (CCPA) & Additional Secretary,
Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government
of India, New Delhi, followed by the
panelists Prof. (Dr.) V. Keshav Rao, Vice-
Chancellor, National University of Study and
Research in Law, Ranchi, Ms. Manisha
Kapoor, Secretary General, The Advertising
Standards Council of India (ASCI), Mumbai,
Dr. Anita A. Patil, Associate Professor,
Ramaiah College of Law, Bengaluru &
Mr. Y.G. Murlidharan, Founder Trustee,
Consumer Rights Education and Awareness
Trust (CREAT), Bengaluru.
3. National Webinar on “Framework for
Implementation of Tobacco Vendor
2 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Licensing in India” was organised by Chair
on Consumer Law & Practice, National Law
School of India University (NLSIU),
Bangalore in association with Campaign for
Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) & a Report was
released by Dr. L Swasthicharan, Additional
Director General, National Tobacco Control
Cell, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare
Department, Government of India at the
National Webinar held on 25th February,
2021.
Resource Person / Guest Lectures
Delivered by Prof.(Dr.) Ashok R. Patil:
1. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was panelist for
“National Consultation on Enforcement
of ENDs ban in India” Organized by
Strategic Institute of Public Health
Education and Research (SIPHER) in
collaboration with E-Resource Centre for
Tobacco Control (E-RCTC) under
Department of Community Medicine &
School of Public Health, PGIMER
Chandigarh and The Union South-East Asia
(The Union), held on 16th June, 2021.
2. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was Panellist for
the webinar on ‘World No Tobacco
Day’,(WHO) deliberated on the theme titled
“Laws & Enforcement ” organized by
Consortium For Tobacco Free Karnataka
(CFTFK), in collaboration with Foundation
for Sustainable Health India (FSHI),
Formerly, Consortium for Tobacco Free
Karnataka, Bangalore held on 31st May
2021.
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
3. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was Resource
Person for National Webinar on “Expanding
Horizons of Consumer Protection Laws”
organized by National University of Study
and Research in Law, Ranchi, held on 25th
March, 2021.
4. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was Resource
Person for consumer awareness programme
on “Protection of E-Consumer under
Consumer Protection Act, 2019” organized
by Ramaiah College of Law, Bangalore, held
on 24th March, 2021.
5. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was Panelist for
“SETTLE 2021” on the topic titled “The
Prospects and Challenges as Online
Mediation becomes more Real” along
with Chittu Nagarajan (ODR Specialist)
Pranjal Sinha (CEO, SAMA) Dr. Suni
Augustine (GM, The Leela Group) Aparna
Mukerjee (Mediator and lawyer) organized
by Settle 2021 Organizing Committee, held
on 19th March, 2021,
6. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was the Chief
Guest for the Inaugural function of “Online
E Filing”, organized by Karnataka State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Basava Bhavan, Basaveshwara Circle,
Bangalore, held on 04th February, 2021.
7. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was the Chief
Guest to deliver a valedictory address for
the attendees of the “International
Mediation Training Program”, organized
by Jagran Lake city University, School of
Law, Centre for International Commercial
Arbitration and Alternate Dispute
Resolution in association with the Indian
Institute of Arbitration & Mediation (IIAM)
and National Law Institute University,
Bhopal (NLIU) held on 16th January 2021.
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
8. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, was Resource
person for Refresher Course in Law &
Human Rights on the topic “Consumer &
Human Rights” organized by UGC- Human
Resource Development Centre & University
Law College, Bangalore University,
Bangalore held on 05th January, 2021.
 Invited Guest Lectures for Distance
Education Contact Classes on Consumer
Welfare Legislations:
1. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil was a Resource
person for Paper-2: Development of
Consumer Protection Law for the Distance
Education Contact Class on 20th June, 2021;
13th June, 2021; 6th June, 2021; 25th April,
2021; 11th April, 2021; 28th March, 2021;
14th March, 2021; 28th February, 2021;
14th February, 2021; & 31st January, 2021.
III. Member of Committee/Body/Organizations:
 Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil has been appointed
as UGC Expert Committee Member, for ‘on-
the-spot’ inspection of other Universities,
constituted by University Grants
Commission, Government of India, Ministry
of Education, New Delhi, for the year 2021.
 Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil has been appointed
as Member of IQAC Committee, Karnataka
State Law University, Navanagar, Hubballi,
for the year 2021.
 Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil has been appointed
as Honorary Advisor to Consortium for
Tobacco Free Karnataka (CFTFK),
Government of Karnataka, Bangalore for
the year 2021.
IV. Academic Meetings attended by Prof.
(Dr.) Ashok R Patil:
 Attended Faculty Meeting at NLSIU,
Bangalore held on 12th May, 2021, 7th April,
2021, 21st April, 2021, 17th March, 2021,
10th March, 2021, 25th February, 2021,
3
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
 External Examiner for Ph.D Viva-Voce “A
study of the Indian Debt Recovery Laws &
its Impact on Borrower’s Rights”,
Pondicherry University, Puducherry held on
30thJune, 2021.
 Attended Distance Education Meeting
(Office hours) held on 31st March, 2021 and
29th May, 2021.
 Attended faculty seminar on “Constitutional
Directives: Morally-Committed Political
Constitutionalism” by Dr. Tarunabh Khaitan,
Professor of Public Law and Legal Theory
at Wadham College (Oxford) and a Vice
Dean at the Faculty of Law (Oxford) held
on 20th May, 2021.
 Meeting on  NAAC  submission with  Vice
Chancellor, NLSIU, Bangalore, held on 13th
May, 2021.
 Meeting & Discussion of Institutional Ethics
Committee, Rajrajeshwari Medical College
& Hospital (RRMCH), held on 11 thMay,
2021.
 Attended faculty meeting of Nirma
University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat held on 20th
April, 2021 and discussed on Consumer
Issues.
 Attended Faculty Seminar on “Rape
adjudication in India in the aftermath of
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013:
findings from trial courts of Delhi held on
7th April, 2021.
VII.
 Attended Board of Studies meeting of Nirma
University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat held on 25th
March, 2021.
 Attended Faculty Seminar held on Religious
Penal Clauses in Context: Country Studies
in Common Law Asia” presented by Mrinal
Satish held on 24th March, 2021.
 Attended Faculty Seminar on “Recent Law
Reforms and their Impact on Child
4 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Marriages” presented by Prof. Sarasu
Thomas, Registrar & Professor of Law,
NLSIU, held on 10th March, 2021.
 Meeting & Discussion of Institutional Ethics
Committee, Rajrajeshwari Medical College
& Hospital (RRMCH), held on 26th February,
2021.
 Attended & discussed in 50th Academic
Council Meeting on 27th February, 2021.
 Attended Distance Education program
Coordinators Meeting, held on 17 th
February, 2021.
 Attended NIRF meeting & discussion with
V ice-Chancellor, NLSIU, held on 02 nd
February, 2021.
 Attended & discussed at IQAC Committee
Meeting for promotion of Assistant
Professors of KSLU, Navanagar, Hubballi
under Career Advancement Scheme of UGC,
held on 25th January, 2021.
 Attended Meeting for Discussion of
Institutional Ethics Committee,
Rajrajeshwari Medical College & Hospital,
held on RRMCH- Ethics Committee
Meeting held on 8th January, 2021
 Attended Meeting & discussed with NAAC
Expert Committee members to finalise the
suggestions, comments & submitted a
consolidated report to the NAAC office held
on 8th January, 2021 to 11th January, 2021.
Meeting and Discussion at International
Webinars:
i. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated in the,
Twitter Chat to engage followers and
encourage discussion on important policies
that can be adopted by policy makers to help
discourage the tobacco use, hosted by
the TakeAPartNow’s, WNTD chat by asking
countries around the world to
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
#CommitToQuit tobacco! Organized by
International Communications, Campaign
for Tobacco-Free Kids, 1400 I Street NW,
Washingt on, D.C., held on 27th May, 2021.
ii. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended Editorial
Board Meeting of International Review of
Financial Consumers (IRFC), had discussion
to write a joint paper for publication about
some issues in Consumer Financial
Protection, organized by Department of
Policy Analysis and Management,
International Review of Financial Consumers
(IRFC), Cornell University, Ithaca NY, held
on 18th May, 2021.
iii. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended Webinar
on “Financial Consumer Protection &
Consumer Scams During Covid: looking
back & Moving Forward” organized by
Attorney General Alliance (AGA)-Africa in
collaboration with the University of Pretoria
held on 22nd April, 2021.
iv. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended ‘The Art
of Law Teaching’ online Teaching and
Learning Seminar, delivered by Prof. Lutz-
Christian Wolff, leading expert, organized
by Chinese University of Hong Kong
(CUHK), Hong Kong SAR, China, wherein
discussed the future of legal education post-
COVID-19, held on 17th March 2021.
v. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended Editorial
Board Meeting of International Review of
Financial Consumers (IRFC),had discussion
to advance the quality and visibility of the
journal for the coming year, organized by
Department of Policy Analysis and
Management, International Review of
Financial Consumers (IRFC), Cornell
University, Ithaca NY, held on 02nd March,
2021.
vi. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil, had a meeting &
discussion on National & International
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
report on “Consumer Protection Law in
Asia”, organized by Hong Kong University,
held on 03rd February, 2021 & 04th February,
2021.
VIII. Meeting and Discussion at National Level
Webinars:
1. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended “50th
anniversary of the publication of John Rawl’s
A Theory of Justice ” organized by MP,
NLSIU, Bangalore, held on 11th May, 2021.
2. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended UNCTAD-
ECA “Regional Dialogue on Consumer
Protection and Health”, organized by
UNCTAD, held on 27th April,2021.
3. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended the
second edition of Antardhwani
Conversations, organized by HCG Hospital,
Bangalore, held on 22nd April, 2021.
4. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended CADR
Teacher’s Training Session 2021 - Teaching
Effective Mediation Skills at University,
organized by the Centre for Alternative
Dispute Resolution (in collaboration with
the Singapore International Mediation
Institute) held on April 13, 2021 speech by
Professor Joel Lee, Faculty of Law, National
University of Singapore.
5. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended
“Assessors Training session” regarding Peer
Team Visit guidelines, wherein discussed
the key changes in the process of onsite
visit, organized by National Assessment
and Accreditation Council (NAAC),
Autonomous Institute of The University
Grants Commission (UGC), Ministry of
Education, Government of India, Bengaluru
held on 22nd March, 2021.
6. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil attended
“Assessors Training session” regarding Peer
Team Visit guidelines, wherein discussed
5
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
the key changes in the process of onsite
visit, organized by National Assessment and
Accreditation Council (NAAC), Autonomous
Institute of The University Grants
Commission (UGC), Ministry of Education,
Government of India, Bengaluru held on
16th March, 2021.
7. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated in
Karnataka Coalition meeting for Tobacco
Control Cell (KCTC) organized by State
Tobacco Control Cell, Health and Family
Welfare Department, Government of
Karnataka, Chaired by Member Secretary,
State Tobacco Control Cell, held on
17th February, 2021.
8. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated and
discussed in a Virtual NGO Roundtable
Conference on ’Strengthening and
safeguarding consumer trust and
rights’ hosted  by  Amazon   involving
representatives from Amazon, Civil Society
Partners, Community Advocates &
Academia held on 10th February, 2021. The
strategic discussions during this event was
revolved around navigating specific
contours of customer trust issues,
highlighted current capacity to deal with
such issues, and deliberated on best
practices and recommendations based on
the present stakeholder experiences.
9. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated &
expressed his views in Online Stakeholders
Consultation on Pecuniary Jurisdiction of
the Consumer Commissions, organized by
the Department of Consumer Affairs, GoI
in association with the Centre for Consumer
Studies, IIPA, welcome address by Prof.
Suresh Misra, Chair-Professor (Consumer
Affairs) & Coordinator, CCS, IIPA Introductory
remarks by Ms. Nidhi Khare, Addl Secretary
6 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
(CA), DoCA, GoI, Inaugural Address by Ms.
Leena Nandan, Secretary, DoCA, GoI held
on 01st February, 2021.
10. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated in
National Webinar on “National Education
Policy 2020: Empowering Students”, well
known educationists deliberated on the
theme. The webinar was moderated by Shri
S. N. Tripathi, Director General, Indian
Institute of Public Administration, Prof.
Suresh Misra, Chair-Professor (Consumer
Affairs) & Coordinator, CCS, IIPA and other
luminaries present in the webinar, organized
by Indian Institute of Public Administration
(IIPA), New Delhi, on 28th January, 2021.
11. Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R. Patil participated in
Online Stakeholder’s Consultation on
“Introduction of E-Pricing on Electronic
Products” organized by the Legal Metrology
Division, Department of Consumer Affairs,
GoI in collaboration with Centre for
Consumer Studies, Indian Institute of Public
Administration, New Delhi on March 10,
2021.
 Online Meeting :
 International Journal on Consumer Law &
Practice (IJCLP) Editorial Board Meeting with
editorial board members held on 01st May,
2021 and 28th June, 2021.
 Meeting & Discussion with Ms. Saroja,
CAG, Tamil Nadu; Mr. Om Prakash Bera,
Principal Consultant, Cardio Vascular
Health, Global Health Advocacy Incubator,
Mr. Ranjit Singh, Senior Advocate, New
Delhi, discussion on Consumer Protection
by means of regulating Transfat in India held
on 12th May, 2021.
 Meeting & Discussion with Dr. Sonu Goel,
Professor, School of Public Health, PGIMER,
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
Chandigarh, New Delhi, Mr. Om Prakash
Bera, Principal Consultant, Cardio Vascular
Health, Global Health Advocacy Incubator,
discussion on Consumer Protection by
means of regulating Transfat held on
05th April, 2021.
 Meeting & Discussion with Mr Dr.
N Bhaskar,  Advisor,  FSSAI,  New Delhi,  Om
Prakash Bera, Principal Consultant, Cardio
Vascular Health, Global Health Advocacy
Incubator, discussion on Consumer
Protection by means of regulating Transfat
held on 05th April, 2021.
 Discussion on “Protection of Consumer
from Passive Smoking in India” with
Campaigning for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK)
on 07th January, 2020, 20th January, 2021,
12th February, 2021, 22nd February, 2021, 24th
February, 2021, 26 th March, 2021, 23 rd
April,2021, 10th June,2021.
 Meeting & Discussion with Mr. Om Prakash
Bera, Principal Consultant, Cardio Vascular
Health, Global Health Advocacy Incubator,
Mr. Sanu Jacob, Director, FSSAI, GoI, on
Consumer Protection by means of regulating
Transfat with on 11th February, 2021.
IX. Internship at CLAP:
 Mr. Akshat Agrawal, 3rd Year   B.A.  LL.B.
(Hons), student of School of  Law, CHRIST
(Deemed to be University), Bangalore,
interned at Chair on Consumer Law and
Practice (CLAP), NLSIU Bengaluru from 01st
January, 2021 to 31st January, 2021.
 Mr. Milind Rajaratnam, 3rd year (6th sem)
B.A.LL.B. (Hons). Student of, Dr. Ram
Manohar Lohiya National Law University
(RMNLU), Lucknow interned at Chair on
Consumer Law and Practice (CLAP), NLSIU
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Bengaluru from 01st June, 2021 to 30th June,
2021.
 Ms. Yukta Kamra, 4 th year B.A. LL.B.,
(Hons), Student of PES University,
Dehradun interned at Chair on Consumer
Law and Practice (CLAP), NLSIU Bengaluru
from 1st June, 2021 to 30th June, 2021.
 Ms. Sakshi, 4th year, B.Com. LL.B., student
of Banasthali V idyapith, Rajasthan,
interned at Chair on Consumer Law and
Practice (CLAP), NLSIU Bengaluru from 1st
June, 2021 to 1st July, 2021.
 Mr. Sparsh Sharma, 4th year, LL.B., (Hons),
student of Rajiv Gandhi School of
Intellectual Property Law (RGSOIPL)
from 3rd June, 2021 to 30th June, 2021.
X. Publications/Research Activity:
 Peer reviewed the article titled “Big Data
Technology- A Paradox to Contemporary
Consumer ’s Consent in The Global
Market” for Journal Volume 7 Issue 1 on
the theme, “Protecting Consumers in the
21st Century: Broadening the Outlook” of
Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law,
Punjab (RGNUL).
 Book Publication: Published book on
“ Tobacco Control Laws: Origin and
Proposed Reforms” this book includes a
brief description with regard to Protection
of Consumer from Passive Smoking and
also recommendation and suggestions to
control tobacco in India- ISBN No. 978-81-
948677-4-6.
XI. Visitors to the CLAP:/CONSULTATION:
 Student Consultation on consumer
protection issues evolved under Consumer
Protection Act, 2019 held on 16th to 17th
April, 2021.
7
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
 Dr. Srinivas Ravindra, Executive Director,
Centre for Sustainable Development,
Bangalore & Mr. Thandava Murthy, Retd.
BBMP Officer, consulted & visited Chair on
Consumer Law & Practice, NLSIU, Bangalore
discussed to prepare the report about the
study on Implementation of Food Safety
Laws in Karnataka, on 20th March, 2021.
UPDATES ON CONSUMER LAW CASES
Banking Sector
1. Nikhil Phutane v. HDFC Bank Ltd., 2021 SCC
OnLine NCDRC 51, MANU/CF/ 0107 / 2021
 If a fund transfer is effected through net
banking and due procedure is followed by
the Bank for the transfer, Bank cannot be
sued for deficiency of service.
Brief Facts: Petitioner/Complaint was an account
holder of HDFC Bank and was working as an
officer with Qatar National Bank. He had
deposited an amount of Rs. 4,60,000/-.
However, after some time, to his surprise that
the entire balance was transferred from his
account to another account as per the Bank
Statement. Later he filed a complaint in view
of the above, the culprit was found by the
police but only an amount of Rs. 70,500/-
could be recovered. Alleging deficiency in
service and seeking recovery of the balance
amount, the Complaint/Petitioner filed the
consumer complaint. OPs denied the fact of
their bank being involved in any fraudulent
act. They contended that funds were
transferred as per the instructions received
from the Complaint through net banking and
Since the Complaint did not respond to the
verification e-mails and messages about the
transfer request received by the Bank, the
transfer was affected. Further, the OPs
contended that the Complaint was informed
8 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
 The Human Rights Protection Foundation,
Vaikunta Baliga College of Law, Udupi, has
undertaken a study sponsored by
Karnataka State Law University,  Hubli  &
consulted CLAP to give comments ,
suggestions & guidance to include ADR
techniques in Consumer Commissions
comparing along with regular Commission
Proceedings on 05th February, 2021.
after the transaction was completed. District
Forum allowed the complaint, whereas the
State Commission held that the Complaint
failed to establish negligence against the
Bank. State Commission also added that the
Bank after following the due procedure,
transferred the funds. Being aggrieved with
the State Commission’s Order, the present
revision petition was filed.
Issue: Whether there was deficiency of service by
the Respondent?
Decision: C. Vishwanath (Presiding Member)
upheld the State Commission’s Order. The
State Commission reco rded that there was
no denial by the Petitioner/Complaint on
receiving the e-mail and SMS nor rebuttal of
the evidence of Air2web filed by the
Respondents/Opposite Parties. The Bank
after following the due procedure,
transferred the fund and there was no
negligence nor deficiency in service
committed by the Bank. The State
Commission, therefore, set aside the order
of the District Forum and allowed the Appeal
of the Respondents/Opposite Parties.
Considering this, Bench noted that the
Petitioner availed of the Net Banking facility
and signed the TPT Form agreeing to the
terms and conditions. He being a Banker
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
himself was aware of the nature of
transactions. He was provided with a
customer ID and Net Banking Password
(IPIN), which he should have kept with
himself. Before the transfer of funds, a
customer was to add the name of
beneficiaries. On any request for transfer of
funds, the Bank sends a mail and SMS alert,
which the Bank has done so in the present
case. The Bank waited for 24 hours and not
receiving any adverse feed-back, effected
the transfer. Once the transfer of funds
was made, again the Petitioner/Complaint
was informed of the same by the
Respondent/ Bank. Only after 47 days of
transaction did the Petitioner choose to
complain. Hence, no deficiency in service on
the part of the respondents was found.
Therefore, Complaint failed to establish that
the Bank had acted mala fidely, fraudulently
and in violation of the security procedure.
No illegality, jurisdictional error or material
irregularity was found in the State
Commission’s order.
2. M.V. Madhu Sudhana v. SBI, Consumer
Case No. 890 of 2020, decided on 06-04-
2021
 CPA provides for a hierarchy of the
Consumer Fora to deal with consumer
complaints, depending upon the pecuniary
value of the complaint.
Brief Facts: The Complaint was given a cash credit
limit of Rs.25 lakhs by the State Bank of
India. It was submitted that OP/SBI had
committed deficiency of service as an
interest of Rs. 18,66,719/- had been
demanded from the Complaint against the
outstanding loan of Rs. 23 lakhs. The
Complaint made following prayers:
1. Pass an award directing the Opposite
Party to pay a sum of Rs. 19,85,27,562/- to
the Complaint towards compensation and
damages for negligence, deficiency in
service and unfair trade practices;
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
2. Pass an award directing the Opposite
Party to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the
Complaint for pain and mental agony;
3. Pass an award directing the Opposite Party
to pay a sum of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- to the
Complaint for loss of closing of the industry
of the Complaint;
4. Pass an award directing the opposite party
to pay a sum of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- to the
Complaint for the loss of reputation;
5. And directing the Opposite Party to pay the
cost of entire proceedings; rectification and
6. Pass such further or other orders as this
National Commission may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case and
thus render justice.
Issue: Whether the Respondent/Bank committed
deficiency of service?
Decision: NCDRC remarked that Consumer
Protection Act, 2019 provides for a hierarchy
of the Consumer Fora to deal with consumer
complaints, depending upon the pecuniary
value of the complaint. Bench noted that in
the instant case, the Complaint had
demanded disproportionate compensation
to inflate the value of the complaint and
reach the pecuniary jurisdiction of this
Commission which is nothing but an abuse
of the process of law.
Hence, the complaint was dismissed in view
of the above discussion, since it did not fall
within the pecuniary jurisdiction of the
National Commission. C. V iswanath
(Presiding Member) while addressing the
complaint reiterated the settled position of
law, expressed that,
Section 58 of the Act provides that the
National Commission shall have jurisdiction
to entertain the Complaint where value of
the goods or services paid as consideration
exceeds rupees ten crores.
9
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
3. Amitabha Dasgupta v. United Bank of India,
[CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3966 OF 2010] LL 2021
SC 101, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 124, AIR 2021
SC 1193, 2021 (2) ALD 264, II (2021) CPJ 3
(SC), (2021) 2 MLJ 459, MANU/SC/ 0100/
2021, 2021 (2) RCR (Civil) 233
 Banks cannot impose unilateral and unfair
terms on the consumers while operating
bank lockers.
Brief Facts: In the early 1950’s, the Appellant’s
mother (since deceased) took a locker on rent
in Respondent No.1’s Bank. The Appellant/
Complainant was included as a joint holder
of the locker. However, the Appellant was
informed that the Bank had broken open his
locker on 22.09.1994 for non-payment of rent
dues for the period of 1993-1994. Further,
that the locker had subsequently been
reallocated to another customer. The
Appellant sent communications to
Respondent No.1 contending that breaking
the locker without permission or intimation
was illegal since he had cleared all the dues.
The Chief Manager of Respondent 1, who
was Respondent No. 3 in the present appeal,
responded to the communication and
apologized for the same. After some days,
the Appellant went to collect the contents
of the locker, it is alleged that he found only
two (one pair of bangles and one pair of ear
pussa) of the seven ornaments that had been
deposited in the locker in a non-sealed
envelope. However, Respondent No.1 Bank
contended that only those two ornaments
were found in the Appellant’s locker when it
was broken open. the Appellant filed a
consumer complaint before the District
Consumer Forum (‘District Forum’) calling
upon Respondent No. 1 to return the seven
ornaments that were in the locker; or
alternatively pay Rs. 3,00,000/- towards the
cost of jewelry, and compensation for
damages suffered by the Appellant. The
District Forum allowed the complaint and
held Respondent No. 1 liable for deficiency
10 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
of service. On appeal, State Commission
upheld the order of District Commission,
however, with respect to recovery of the cost
of the ornaments, it held that the dispute on
the contents of the locker can only be
decided upon provision of elaborate
evidence. Against this order, one revision
petition was filed before National
Commission and it also accepted the order
of the State Commission. Aggrieved by this,
appeal was filed before Supreme Court.
Issues: Whether the Bank owes a duty of care to
the locker holder under the laws of bailment
or any other law with respect to the contents
of the locker? Whether the same can be
effectively adjudicated in the course of
consumer dispute proceedings? Second,
irrespective of the answer to the previous
issue, whether the Bank owes an
independent duty of care to its customers
with respect to diligent management and
operation of the locker, separate from its
contents? Whether compensation can be
awarded for non­compliance with such duty?
Decision: The Supreme Court observed that the
banks owe a duty of care to exercise due
diligence in maintaining and operating their
locker or safety deposit systems and that
they cannot contract out of the minimum
standard of care in this regard. The banks
cannot wash off their hands and claim that
they bear no liability towards their
customers for the operation of the locker.
The Apex Court said while directing the
Reserve Bank of India to lay down Rules and
Regulations mandating the steps to be taken
by banks with respect to locker facility/safe
deposit facility management. The Court
further held that until such regulations are
framed and issued by the RBI, the following
guidelines have to be followed by the bank:
Irrespective of the value of the articles
placed inside the locker, the bank is under a
separate obligation to ensure that proper
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
procedures are followed while allotting and
operating the lockers:
(a) This includes maintenance of a locker
register and locker key register.
(b) The locker register shall be consistently
updated in case of any change in allotment.
(c) The bank shall notify the original locker
holder prior to any changes in the allotment
of the locker, and give them reasonable
opportunity to withdraw the articles
deposited by them if they so wish.
(d) Banks may consider utilizing appropriate
technologies, such as block chain technology
which is meant for creating digital ledger for
this purpose.
(e) The custodian of the bank shall additionally
maintain a record of access to the lockers,
containing details of all the parties who have
accessed the lockers and the date and time
on which they were opened and closed.
(f) The bank employees are also obligated to
check whether the lockers are properly
closed on a regular basis. If the same is not
done, the locker must be immediately closed
and the locker holder shall be promptly
intimated so that they may verify any
resulting discrepancy in the contents of the
locker.
(g) The concerned staff shall also check that the
keys to the locker are in proper condition.
(h) In case the lockers are being operated
through an electronic system, the bank shall
take reasonable steps to ensure that the
system is protected against hacking or any
breach of security.
(i) The customers’ personal data, including their
biometric data, cannot be shared with third
parties without their consent. The relevant
rules under the Information Technology Act,
2000 will be applicable in this regard.
(j) The bank has the power to break open the
locker only in accordance with the relevant
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
laws and RBI regulations, if any. Breaking
open of the locker in a manner other than
that prescribed under law is an illegal act
which amounts to gross deficiency of
service on the part of the bank as a service
provider.
(k) Due notice in writing shall be given to the
locker holder at a reasonable time prior to
the breaking open of the locker. Moreover,
the locker shall be broken open only in the
presence of authorized officials and an
independent witness after giving due notice
to the locker holder. The bank must prepare
a detailed inventory of any articles found
inside the locker, after the locker is opened,
and make a separate entry in the locker
register, before returning them to the locker
holder. The locker holder’s signature should
be obtained upon the receipt of such
inventory so as to avoid any dispute in the
future.
(l) The bank must undertake proper verification
procedures to ensure that no unauthorized
party gains access to the locker. In case the
locker remains inoperative for a long period
of time, and the locker holder cannot be
located, the banks shall transfer the contents
of the locker to their nominees/legal heirs
or dispose of the articles in a transparent
manner, in accordance with the directions
issued by the RBI in this regard.
(m) The banks shall also take necessary steps
to ensure that the space in which the locker
facility is located is adequately guarded at
all times.
(n) A copy of the locker hiring agreement,
containing the relevant terms and conditions,
shall be given to the customer at the time of
allotment of the locker so that they are
intimated of their rights and responsibilities.
(o) The bank cannot contract out of the minimum
standard of care with respect to maintaining
the safety of the lockers as outlined supra.
11
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
4. HDFC Bank & Anr. v. Jesna Jose, Revision
Petition No. 3333 of 2013, 2020 SCC OnLine
NCDRC 507, MANU/CF/ 0531 / 2020
 Bank is Liable For Fraudulent Online
Transaction If Account Holder’s Fault Not
Proved.
Brief Facts: The Complaint-customer had stated
that the credit card was in her possession
when the disputed transactions had taken
place. She further stated that the
transactions had taken place remotely,
several miles away from her actual location
and therefore, the reason for the fraudulent
transactions must be forgery/hacking of the
card or some other technical and/or security
lapse in the electronic banking system
through which the transactions had taken
place. The Bank had on the other stated that
the Credit Card must have been stolen and
that it is due to the Card Holder’s negligence
that she lost safe custody of her card.
Aggrieved by this, the Complaint had filed
consumer complaint wherein the Bank was
held liable. Against this decision, the Bank
had filed an appeal before State Commission
which was also dismissed. Later another
appeal was filed before the National
Commission to quash the order of the State
Commission.
Issue: Whether Bank is liable for fraud in online
transaction if the fault of account holder is
not proved?
Decision: Forum held that in case of fraudulent
transactions leading to withdraw of money
from a person’s bank account, the concerned
bank shall be responsible for the loss, not
the customer, if it is not proven that the
fraudulent transaction had taken place due
to account holder’s fault. It stated that in a
case where the Bank has been unable to
prove that the impugned fraudulent
transaction had taken place due to account
holder’s fault, for example loss of credit
card, the Bank shall be made liable for the
unauthorized transactions, as it is deemed
12 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
that there was a security lapse in the
electronic banking system through which the
transactions had taken place. It further held
that bank cannot rely on arbitrary terms and
conditions to wriggle out of its liability
towards customers and any such terms and
conditions must be in conformity with the
directions issued by the RBI which is
responsible for safekeeping of the Banking
Systems and maintaining checks and
balances in the same. The Court noted that
the Bank had failed to produce any evidence
to substantiate its averment that the credit
card was stolen or that the Complaint had
resorted to any fraud/forgery.
Automobile Sector
5. Shashank Shah v. Gurjeet Singh Maan,
Revision Petition No. 1205 of 2014, decided
on 01-04-2021
 Selling a second-hand car, in place of a new
car, after accepting the full consideration
price for a new car, inter alia constitutes
‘unfair trade practice’ under Section 2(1)(r)
of the Consumer Protection Act.
Brief Facts: The Complaint got a second-hand car
instead of a new car from the Opposite Party
after obtaining the full consideration price
of a new car. It was agreed that the Opposite
Party would deliver the new car, however,
later he delivered a second hand car. After
knowing this, the Complaint filed a consumer
complaint before District Commission
alleging unfair trade practices. The District
Commission held that the car sold was
second hand car and it had awarded
compensation to Opposite Party to pay. Then
an appeal was filed before State Commission
challenging the said order. State Commission
determined that the District Forum was
correct in concluding that a second-hand car
was delivered to the Complaint instead of a
new one. Further, it was also determined that
the compensation awarded by the District
Forum was just and equitable.
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
State Commission’s Order:  2021 SC 1149, 2021 (2) ALLMR 746, MANU/
“OPs/respondents refuted the allegations
leveled by the Complaint in the complaint
and averred that at the time of Chhattisgarh
Rajyotsav Fair, the vehicle was booked by
Hardeep Singh Hora, on payment of
Rs.10,000/-. But, later on, no amount was
paid by that person and the vehicle was
never delivered to Hardeep Singh Hora and
so it remained a branch new vehicle and it
was sold to the Complaint. As such it was
not an old or secondhand vehicle and so no
amount was payable to the Complaint as
compensation.” Against  this  judgment,
Revision Petition was instituted under
Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986 before NCDRC.
Issue: Whether the OP delivered second hand car
instead of new car and committed unfair
trade practice?
Decision: Bench noted from the examination made
by two fora below, after obtaining the total
consideration price of new car, a second-
hand car, instead of a new car, was delivered
by the OPs to the Complaint. Commission
remarked that the present case revolved
around unfair trade practice and stated that:
Factum of selling a second-hand car, in place
of a new car, after accepting the full
consideration price for a new car, inter alia
constitutes ‘unfair trade practice’ (“unfair
method or unfair or deceptive practice”)
within the meaning of Section 2(1)(r) of the
Act 1986. Dinesh Singh, Presiding Member,
held that, “…selling a second-hand car, in
place of a new car, after accepting the full
consideration price for a new car, inter alia
constitutes ‘unfair trade practice’ under
Section 2(1)(r) of the Consumer Protection
Act.” Hence, the district forum’s order which
was upheld by the State Commission was
sustained.
6. Tata Motors Ltd v. Anonio Paulo Vaz and
Another, Civil Appeal No. 574 / 2021, LL
2021 SC 105, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 125, AIR
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
SC/0099 / 2021, 2021 (2) RCR (Civil) 219
 Sale of defective car due to dealer’s fault
will not make car manufacturer liable
unless knowledge can be proved.
Brief Facts: The 1st Respondent i.e. Anonio Paulo
Vaz bought a car after paying the agreed
total consideration price in 2011 to the
second respondent, Vistar Goa (P) Ltd, a
dealer in cars (hereafter “the dealer”). At
the time of purchase, 1st Respondent had
taken loan. A 2009 model car which had run
622 kilometres was sold to him in place of a
new car of 2011 make. Therefore, the 1st
Respondent sought for refund of the amount.
However, he did not get any refund.
Therefore he served a legal notice to the
dealer. Later, as he did not get any respond
from the dealer and the Appellant, he moved
to the Goa District Commission and filed a
complaint. The District Forum allowed the
reliefs sought in the complaint, holding the
manufacturer and dealer liable jointly and
severally and directed to pay Rs. 20,000/-.
Tata Motors filed appeal in the State
Commission arguing that it cannot be held
liable for the dealer’s fault. The appeal was
dismissed. Then appeal was filed before
National Commission. The National
Commission, in further appeal by Tata
Motors, affirmed the findings of State
Commission and the District Forum.
Aggrieved, Tata Motors approached the
Supreme Court.
Issue: Whether manufacturer was liable for dealer’s
deficiency?
Decision: The Supreme Court, after examining the
terms of the dealership agreement, noted
that the relationship was on a “principle-to-
principle” basis. The Court also noted that
there were no pleadings by the Complaint
that Tata Motors had special knowledge of
the deficiencies of the dealer. Court held that
The record establishes the absolute dearth
of pleadings by the Complaint with regard
13
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
to the Appellant’s role, or special knowledge
about the two disputed issues, i.e. that the
dealer had represented that the car was
new, and in fact sold an old, used one, or
that the undercarriage appeared to be worn
out. Court opined that no doubt, the absence
of the dealer or any explanation on its part,
resulted in a finding of deficiency on its part,
because the car was in its possession, was
a 2009 model and sold in 2011. Court
observed that the dealer did not
acknowledge any such deficiency before
purchase of the car and furthermore, the car
had been made over to the dealer on
28.02.2009. Therefore, it is difficult to expect
the Appellant, a manufacturer, to be aware
of the physical condition of the car, two
years after its delivery to the dealer. Unless
the manufacturer’s knowledge is proved, a
decision fastening liability upon the
manufacturer would be untenable, given that
its relationship with the dealer, in the facts
of this case, were on principal to- principal
basis. At last the Court held that
manufacturer is not liable for the dealer’s
deficiency.
CPA (Interpretation)
7. Neena Aneja and Ors v. Jai Prakash
Associations Ltd.,
Civil Appeal Nos. 3766-3767 of 2020, LL
2021 SC 164, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 225, AIR
2021 SC 1441, MANU/SC/ 0190 / 2021
 Consumer complaints filed before the
coming into effect of the Consumer
Protection Act, 2019 (CPA 2019) should
continue in the fora in which they were
filed as per the pecuniary jurisdiction
under the previous Consumer Protection
Act of 1986 (CPA 1986).
Brief Facts: The Respondent provisionally
allotted a residential unit in a real-estate
project described as KRESCENT Homes
admeasuring a super built area of 114.27
square metres which was being developed
14 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
by the Respondent at Jaypee Greens, Noida
based upon the advance payment of Rs. 3.50
lacs on 25 November 2011 by the Appellants.
The total consideration was fixed at Rs.56.45
lacs and possession was intended to be
conveyed within a period of 42 months from
the execution of the agreement of the
provisional allotment letter. The Appellants
have stated that between December 2011
till date, they have paid an amount of
Rs. 53.84 lacs out of the total consideration
of Rs. 56.45 lacs. On 13 June 2017 and 27
April 2020, the Appellant sought a refund of
the consideration together with interest at
18 per cent. On 18 June 2020, the Appellants
instituted a consumer complaint before the
NCDRC for refund with interest. The
consumer complaint has been dismissed by
an order dated 30 July 2020 for want of
pecuniary jurisdiction. A single member
Bench of the NCDRC held that following the
enforcement of the Act of 2019 on 20 July
2020, the limits of its pecuniary jurisdiction
stands enhanced from rupees one crore to
rupees ten crores and the complaint
instituted by the Appellants is consequently
not maintainable. The Appellants instituted
a petition seeking a review of the order. The
review petition was dismissed on 5 October
2020 leading to the institution of the appeal
before Supreme Court.
Issue: Whether a complaint which was filed and
registered under the Act of 1986, before the
new Act of 2019 came into force, has to be
entertained under the provisions of the
erstwhile legislation?
Decision: Supreme Court held that consumer
complaints filed before the coming into
effect of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
(CPA, 2019) should continue in the fora in
which they were filed as per the pecuniary
jurisdiction under the previous Consumer
Protection Act of 1986 (CPA, 1986). Bench
set aside the directions of the National
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
that the previously instituted cases as per
the 1986 Act should be transferred to the
respective fora as per the new pecuniary
limits under the 2019 Act. It mentioned that
all proceedings instituted before July 20,
2020 shall continue to be heard by the fora
constituted under the 1986 Act and they are
not to be transferred to the new fora as per
the pecuniary jurisdiction as per the 2019
Act. Bench also referred Section 107 of the
CPA 2019, which repealed the 1986 Act and
held that Section 107 (2) has saved “the
previous operation” of any repealed
enactment or “anything duly done or
suffered thereunder to the extent that it is
not inconsistent with the provisions of the
new legislation”. Section 107(3) indicates
that the general application of Section 6 of
the General Clauses Act is not prejudiced. It
further referred to Section 6 of the General
Clauses Act which provides for governing
principles with regard to the impact of the
repeal of a central statute or regulation.
These governing principles are to apply,
“unless a different intention appears”.
Clause (c) of Section 6 inter alia stipulates
that a repeal would not affect “any right,
privilege, obligation or liability acquired,
accrued or incurred under any enactment so
repealed”. Clause (e) of Section 6 ensures
that a legal proceeding which has been
initiated to protect or enforce “such right”
will not be affected and that it can be
continued as if the repealing legislation has
not been enacted. The Supreme Court
observed that there is no express language
indicating that all pending cases would stand
transferred to the fora created by the Act of
2019 by applying its newly prescribed
pecuniary limits.
CPA Case (Interpretation)
8. Mehra Bal Chikitsalaya Evam Navjat
Shishu ICU v. Manoj Upadhyaya, Petition
(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
4127 / 2021, LL 2021 SC 163, MANU/ SCOR/
10842/ 2021
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
 Neither revisional jurisdiction nor
appellate Jurisdiction by the National
Commission could be exercised against the
impugned orders passed by the State
Commission.
Issue: Whether in against exercise of revisional
powers by State Commission u/s.17(1)(b),
any remedy is available before the National
Commission or not?
Decision: The Supreme Court took up the matter
and held that neither revisional jurisdiction
nor appellate Jurisdiction by the National
Commission could be exercised against the
impugned orders passed by the State
Commission. The Court therefore proceeded
to consider the matter on merits by rejecting
the objection as to jurisdiction. It further
observed that the window of interference
available to the Court u/Art.226 in matters
of this nature where orders of statutorily
created tribunals [District Forum & State
Commission] are under challenge, is
extremely limited and dismissed the writ
petition. The Bench referred to Cicily
Kallarackal vs. Vehicle Factory, (2012) 8 SCC
524 wherein it was held that the order of
the National Consumer Commission are
incapable of being questioned under the writ
jurisdiction of the High Court, as a statutory
appeal in terms of Section 27 A(1)(c) lies to
the Supreme Court.
9. Daddy’s Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Manisha
Bhargava [SLP (Civil) No. 1240 of 2021] LL
2021 SC 78, 2020 SCC OnLine NCDRC 697,
AIR 2021 SC 946, 2021 (2) CTC 589, 2021 (2)
KHC 184, 2021 (2) KLT 98, MANU/SC/0072
/ 2021, (2021) 3 SCC 669
 Consumer Fora Has No Power To Accept
Written Statement Beyond Period Of 45
Days, Reiterates Supreme Court.
Brief Facts: In this case, the National Commission
has dismissed the said appeal confirming the
order passed by the Karnataka State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
15
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
rejecting the application filed by the
Petitioners herein seeking condonation of
delay in filing the written version/written
statement to the consumer complaint,
original Respondent nos. 1 & 2- Petitioners
herein have preferred the present special
leave petition. The State Commission had
rejected the application filed by the
Petitioners herein seeking condonation of
delay in filing the written statement/written
version to the consumer complaint. Hence,
against the order of the National
Commission, special leave petition was filed
before Supreme Court.
Issue: Whether the State Commission has the power
to condone the delay beyond 45 days for
filing the written statement under Section
13 of the Act?
Decision: The Supreme Court held that it is required
to be noted that as per the decision of this
Court in the case of J.J. Merchant v. Shrinath
Chaturvedi, reported in (2002) 6 SCC 635,
which was a three Judge Bench decision,
consumer fora has no power to extend the
time for filing a reply/written statement
beyond the period prescribed under the Act.
However, thereafter, despite the above three
Judge Bench decision, a contrary view was
taken by a two Judge Bench and therefore
the matter was referred to the five Judge
Bench and the Constitution Bench has
reiterated the view taken in the case of
J.J.Merchant (supra) and has again reiterated
that the consumer fora has no power and/or
jurisdiction to accept the written statement
beyond the statutory period prescribed under
the Act, i.e., 45 days in all. However, it was
found that in view of the order passed by
this Court in Reliance General Insurance Co.
Ltd. (supra) dated 10.02.2017, pending the
decision of the larger 5 Bench, in some of
the cases, the State Commission might have
condoned the delay in filing the written
statement filed beyond the stipulated time
of 45 days and all those orders condoning
the delay and accepting the written
16 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
statements shall not be affected.
Another contention was that the judgment
in Reliance  General  Insurance  Co.  Ltd.  v.
M/s Mampee Timbers & Hardwares Pvt.
Ltd. had directed the consumer fora to accept
the written statement beyond the stipulated
time of 45 days in an appropriate cases. The
court agreed with the view of the National
Commission that there was no mandate in
the said judgment that in all the cases where
the written statement was submitted beyond
the stipulated period of 45 days, the delay
must be condoned and the written
statement must be taken on record.
Dismissing the appeal, the bench observed
that in any case, in view of the earlier
decision of this Court in the case of J.J.
Merchant (supra) and the subsequent
authoritative decision of the Constitution
Bench of this Court in the case of New India
Assurance Company Limited v. Hilli
Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (2020)
5 SCC 757, consumer fora has no jurisdiction
and/or power to accept the written
statement beyond the period of 45 days and
the order of the National Commission was
upheld.
Educational Sector
10. Rajendra Kumar Gupta v. Dr. V irendra
Swarup Public School & Anr, First Appeal
No. 852 of 2016, 2021 SCC OnLine NCDRC
24, MANU/CF/ 0026 / 2021
Education, Including Co-Curricular
Activities, Not ‘Service’ Within Meaning
Of Consumer Protection Act : NCDRC.
Brief Facts: The Appellant is the father of Late
Master Runak Gupta, who was studying in
the Respondent School i.e., Dr. Virendra
Swarup Public School. In the year of 2007,
school offered various activities for summer
camp including swimming. The fees for the
said activity was Rs. 1,000/-. The Appellant
also paid the fees and his son also
participated in the activity. On 28.05.2007
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
at about 9.30 A.M., the Appellant received
an urgent call from the School requesting him
to come immediately as his son was unwell.
When he reached the hospital, he was
informed that his son was drowned in the
swimming pool of the school. Later he saw
the dead body of his son and learnt that his
son was brought dead to the hospital. He
then filed a complaint in the State
Commission alleging negligence and
deficiency in service on part of the School
and claimed Rs. 20,00,000/- as compensation
for the death of his son as well as Rs.
2,00,000/- on account of mental agony
suffered by him and Rs. 55,000/- towards
the cost of litigation. The Opposite Party took
the contention that Complaint was not a
Consumer as the Educational Institutions are
not covered under the ambit of Consumer
Protection Act. Factum of death of
Complaint’s son due to drowning in the
swimming pool was admitted by the
Opposite Parties. It was stated that the
incident of drowning was not attributable to
the negligence of the School as all necessary
services and equipment was duly provided
by them and the Swimming Pool was under
strict supervision. Therefore, there was no
deficiency in service on the part of the
Opposite Parties. The State Commission
upheld the contention of the Opposite Party
and held that the Appellant was not
consumer and question raised in the
complaint does not cover under the
Consumer Protection Act. Aggrieved by this,
the Appellant filed an appeal and prayed to
set aside the order of the State Commission.
Issue: Whether the Appellant was consumer and
education along with co-curricular activity
offered by the Opposite Party’s school
comes within service under the Consumer
Protection Act?
Decision: The NCDRC referred to several cases
while delivering the judgment. It referred to
the cases of Anupama College of Engineering
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
v. Gulshan Kumar & Anr wherein it was held
by the Supreme Court that ”educational
institutions are not providing any kind of
service, therefore, in a matter of admission,
fees etc. there cannot be question of
deficiency of service” and Manu Solanki and
Ors v. Vinayaka Mission University wherein
a larger Bench of NCDRC had held that ”such
incidental activities of an Education
Institutional while imparting education
would also not amount to rendering any
service under the provisions of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986". Following these
precedents, the NCDRC observed that it
was a settled law, as stated in the
aforementioned precedents set by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this
Commission, that Educational Institutions
do not fall within the ambit of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 and education which
includes co-curricular activities such as
swimming, is not a “service” within the
meaning of the Consumer Protection Act,
1986. Therefore, the Bench concured with
the view of the State Commission that the
Complaint is not a consumer and the
Complaint not being covered under the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not
maintainable.
Agricultural Sector
11. Adama Agan Ltd. v. Ramesh, 2021 SCC
OnLine NCDRC 3, decided on 18-01-2021,
2021 SCC OnLine NCDRC 3, I (2021) CPJ 182
(NC), MANU/ CF/ 0014 / 2021
 If a farmer suffers crop loss due to the
usage of herbicides bought from a dealer
or manufacturer of agri-inputs, he can
claim a loss for crop damage.
Brief Facts: The Respondent/Complaint had sown
sugarcane in one acre of land in village
Baland, Tehsil and District Rohtak. He had
purchased herbicides worth Rs. 7,990/- vide
receipt no. 11460 dated 20.06.2016 from the
Petitioner No. 1/OP1. It so happened that
17
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
the crop which was otherwise doing well,
as per the complaint, after spraying of
herbicides, suffered severe damage. Upon
informing the OPs, Complaint received no
response. The SDAO (sub divisional
agriculture officer/office) was informed.
Inspection of the affected crop was carried
out and a report submitted. Consumer
complaint seeking compensation of Rs.
1,60,000/- on account of crop damage was
filed. The District Forum considered the
arguments of the OPs and concluded that
the fact that the circular of Deputy Director
of Agriculture dated 3.1.2002 was not
complied with while constituting the
inspection team was a mere inadvertence
and did not suggest any malafide intention.
It allowed the complaint to the extent of
Rs. 72,850/-, this being the loss on account
of 235 quintals of sugarcane in one acre land
@ Rs. 310/- per quintal, with interest of 9%
from the date of filing of the complaint. In
the appeal filed before State Commission,
reasoning and logic of the District Forum was
upheld by the State Commission. Hence, an
appeal was filed before the National
Commission.
Issue: Whether there was deficiency in service
rendered by the Opposite Party and whether
the order of the State Commission needs
revision?
Decision: Bench opined that no ground for revision
of the State Commission’s order was
required. Bench observed that an internal
circular of Deputy Director of Agriculture was
circulated regarding the composition of the
inspection team for the purpose of smooth
functioning of the Department of Agriculture
in its subordinate filed offices for fulfilling
its role of assisting the farmers, including
taking prompt action on any complaint as is
in the present matter. On noting the above,
the Commission stated that, to not have
included a representative of the OPs was,
at worst, an irregularity. Commission also
18 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
added to its reasoning that the business
entities viz. dealers, manufacturers of agri-
inputs (seeds, herbicides) carry a special
responsibility. They are expected to properly
inform the farmer and follow up after sale,
to ensure that the farmer has understood and
is following all the instructions. Further it
held that the same goes for the
manufacturers of agri-inputs: their dealers
should be properly trained to ensure that
they see their job as not merely one selling
but as providing after-sale service through
regular follow up. With regard to the
revisionary jurisdiction, Bench referred to the
decision of the Supreme Court in Rubi
(Chandra) Dutta v. United India Insurance Co.
Ltd., (2011)  11 SCC  269. Hence,  in view  of
the above discussion, Bench dismissed the
revision petitions and upheld the order of
the State Commission.
Stock Exchange Sector
12. R.R. Chokhani Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v. New
India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2021 SCC OnLine
NCDRC 20, MANU/CF/ 0025 / 2021
 If an employee of a stockbroker conducted
fraudulent arbitrage operations for
personal benefit causing loss to stockbroker
company, that would be covered under
‘Fidelity’ clause of an insurance claim.
Brief Facts: The Complainant M/s R.R. Chokhani
Stock Brokers P. Ltd. is a member of Bombay
Stock Exchange (hereinafter referred to as
“BSE”) since October, 1985. It’s Director and
Principal Officer was Mr. Ramakant
R.Chokhani. The Complainant Co. was
engaged in the business of arbitrage
between NSE and BSE. As per the mandatory
requirements of Securities and Exchange
Board of India (SEBI) and also as per laws of
NSE and BSE, the Complainant Co. took the
insurance cover from the Opposite Party for
cover amount of Rs. 1 Crore. The Complainant
was renewing the said policy every year
regularly. The Insurance policy covers inter
CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
alia “fidelity” under Section 1A of the terms
and conditions of the policy. Since 1989, Mr.
Nilesh Patel was a key permanent employee
of the Complaint Co. He was incharge and
looking after the arbitrage operations. On
15.03.2000 for the first time, the Co. noticed
some fraudulent arbitrage operations and
the entries of buying/selling transactions
made by Mr. Nilesh Patel between
01.03.2000 and 14.03.2000 for his personal
benefit. It was without knowledge and any
authority from the Complainant Co. He
concealed it by manipulating the software
data. After this, he committed suicide and a
case which was filed against him on this
regard, got closed on his demise. The
Complainant Co. suffered a huge loss
amounting to Rs. 2.50 crores from the
aforesaid fraud and therefore the Co. was
liable to compensate its clients as well as
third parties. On 31.03.2000, the Complainant
Co. filed an insurance claim with Opposite
Party Insurance Co. The Opposite Party
appointed M/s Parimal R. Shah & Co. and
M/s Padamsey P. Shah & Co. as joint
Surveyors for assessing the loss suffered by
the Complainant Co. However, OP rejected
the claim of the Complainant Co. on the
ground of speculative trading entered into
by its employee which was outside the scope
of the policy. The insurance company gave
its observations to Opposite Party on
23.10.2002 wherein it was categorically
stated that the loss incurred to the
Complainant was due to fraud and infidelity
of its employee and it was not speculative
trading, and in view thereof, the rejection of
the Opposite Party was illegal. The Opposite
Party still thereafter refused to settle the
insurance claim. Being aggrieved by the
illegal denial for settlement of the claim, the
Co. filed the Consumer Complaint before
National Commission and prayed for the
compensation amounting to Rs. 1 crore with
an interest @18% p.a. and Rs. 10 lakhs
towards harassment and mental agony.
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Issue: Whether the complaint was maintainable?
Whether there was any deficiency of Service
by the Opposite Party?
Decision: Bench observed that the two surveyors
appointed by the insurance company failed
to act as per IRDA guidelines and
unnecessarily delayed the settlement of the
claim. Complaint company though had
submitted the entire details as sought, yet
the surveyors made repeated demands for
additional information. The Bench held, “on
perusal of material on record, it revealed us
that the Complaint Co. submitted entire
details as sought by the Surveyors. However,
the Surveyors made repeated demand, for
production of additional information. It
clearly shows the conduct of the Surveyors
to delay the claim unnecessarily. They did
not follow the IRDA guidelines (supra), in our
view it was the deficiency in service on the
part of the Opposite Party”. Therefore, the
Commission found that the surveyors did not
follow the IRDA guidelines which was a
deficiency of service of the part of the OP.
The Bench noted that the claim of the
Complaint Co. is squarely covered under
Section 1A i.e. “FIDELITY”, which is
reproduced as below: “1. FIDELITY- Loss
resulting solely and directly from dishonest
or fraudulent acts by Employees of the
Insured committed with the manifest intent
to cause the insured to sustain such loss or
to obtain a financial gain for themselves
wherever committed and whether committed
alone or in collusion with others, including
loss of property through any such acts by
Employees.” The evidence on record clearly
establishes that the Complaint Co. suffered
loss due to fraudulent acts of Mr. Nilesh
Patel, the employee of the Co. The Surveyor
assessed the loss to the tune of Rs. 1 Crore.
However, the claim was repudiated. Based
on the entirety the deficiency in service on
the part of Insurance Co. was evident. OP
was directed to pay an insurance claim of
19
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
Rs. 1 crore to the Complaint co. along with
interest @ 9% p.a.
13. Sudipta Chakrobarty v. Ranaghat S.D.
Hospital [CIVIL APPEAL No.9404 / 2019] LL
2021 SC 100, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 1180, II
(2021) CPJ 19 (SC), MANU/ SC/0098 / 2021
 NCDRC must Pass Reasoned Judgment
Along With Operative Order.
Brief Facts: In this case, the reasoned order was
passed by the National Commission. The
operative order was pronounced on
26.04.2019, and in the reasoned judgment
was made available after eight months. The
Court directed the Registrar of the National
Commission to submit a Report stating the
number of cases in which reasoned
judgments had not been passed, even
though the operative order had been
pronounced in Court.
Decision: The Supreme Court, criticizing the
practice of ‘reasons to follow’ orders,
directed the National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission to pass reasoned
Judgment along with the operative order. The
bench observed that, in all matters before
NCDRC where reasons are yet to be
delivered, it must be ensured that the same
are made available to the litigating parties
positively within a period of two months. It
also held that undisputedly, the rights of the
aggrieved parties are being prejudiced if the
reasons are not available to them to avail of
the legal remedy of approaching the Court
where the reasons can be scrutinized. It
indeed amounts to defeating the rights of
the party aggrieved to challenge the
impugned judgment on merits and even the
succeeding party is unable to obtain the
fruits of success of the litigation. The bench
observed the recent order passed in Oriental
Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Zaixhu Xie & Ors. which
held that delay in delivery of judgments is a
violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of
India and the problems gets aggravated
20 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
when the operative portion is made
available early, and the reasons follow much
later, or are not made available for an
indefinite period.
Real Estate Sector
14. Manglam Build-Developers Ltd. v. Aviral
Mathur, 2021  SCC  OnLine  NCDRC  15,I
(2021) CPJ 226 (NC), MANU/CF/ 0009/ 2021
 A person who purchases a fully
constructed real estate property (a Villa
in the present case) with eyes wide open,
cannot subsequently claim what all was
offered in the original brochure.
Brief Facts: The Complainant had, on 16.1.2013,
booked villa no. 17 in Manglam Arpan on a
plot measuring 165 sq. yards. The total
consideration was Rs. 62 Lakh as settled and
agreed between the parties in the Agreement
to Sell. Initial payment of Rs. 11 Lakh
(Rs. 9.7 Lakh vide cheque no. 695528 dated
25.1.2013 and Rs. 1.3 Lakh in cash on
26.2.2013) was made against receipts except
for cash receipt of Rs. 30,000/-. Further,
payments of Rs. 2 Lakh in cash on 13.3.2013,
Rs. 45 Lakh vide cheque no. 030103 on
31.1.2013, Rs. 2 Lakh in cash on 16.7.2013
and then Rs. 1 Lakh vide cheque no.198950
on 27.11.2013, aggregating Rs. 61 Lakh, was
made till the time for filing of the consumer
complaint. As per the plaint, 5% of the BSP
(Basic Sale Price) was to be paid only after
the Complainants were fully satisfied with
the V illa and other facilities. The
Complainants have been residing at this
Villa since April, 2013. The complaint was
filed before Rajasthan State Commission
wherein the Commission had allowed the
complaint and ordered the Opposite Party
to pay Rs. 2 Lakhs as compensation for the
defects and deficiencies in the construction
and restrained them from extending the Club
House facilities created for the residents of
Manglam Arpan. Aggrieved by this, the
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
Opposite Party filed an appeal before the
National Commission.
Issues: (i) Whether after having taken possession
of the Villa, it was permissible to raise
grievances regarding defects, given that the
Complainant had purchased an already
constructed villa and had thus done so with
their eyes wide open;
(ii) Whether the Complainant, being one
individual occupying one villa from out of 97
villas and 47 apartments in a housing
complex could seek reliefs affecting all other
residents, through an individual consumer
complaint;
(iii) a sub-issue was whether the State
Commission could have granted both reliefs
which were, in fact, sought as an alternative
to each other.
Decision: The National Commission partly allowed
the case and held that the impugned order
of the State Commission deserved
consideration. The Bench stated that
Complainants grievance qua the clubhouse
as being only for the exclusive use of the
residents of the villa, to the exclusive of all
others, cannot stand. As per the agreement
referred above, the Complainant was
provided with the facility of a clubhouse and
he had paid a fee for it, in a similar manner,
others including the apartment owners had
also paid a fee for the use of the clubhouse.
Therefore, the Commission was unable to
understand regarding how the Complainant,
in his individual capacity was claiming
exclusiveness of the clubhouse only for the
residents of the villa. With regarding making
demands by referring to the brochure,
Commission answered the Complainant that
as far as the Complainant was concerned,
he visited the site, the villa, liked what he
saw, signed an agreement, and was given
possession of that, within a few months. The
Complainant clearly did all this with his eyes
wide open. It was therefore not for him to
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
now refer to what all had been promised in
the brochure(s) and start making demands
based on that.
15. In Re Distribution of Essential Supplies and
Services During Pandemic, Suo Moto Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 3/ 2021, 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 390, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 193
 Distribution of Essential Services and
Supplies during Pandemic-Covid-19
Vaccine Pricing and Distribution cannot
be given to the Manufacturers.
Brief Facts: The Supreme Court suo motto took this
matter. The Court took note of the
unprecedented humanitarian crisis in the
country, following the outbreak of the COVID-
19 pandemic. Notices were issued to the
Union of India, the Governments of the States
and Union Territories, and to several
Petitioners who were before the High Courts.
Decision: The Supreme Court held that, ‘do not
leave the vaccine pricing and distribution to
the manufactures, This is equity over public
goods. You need to pick up the responsibility
for this’. Further the Apex Court held,
“whether the procurement is for the central
government or the states, it is ultimately
meant for the citizens. Why must we not
adopt the model of the National
Immunisation Programme?” The Court
questioned that why can’t the Centre acquire
hundred percent, identify the manufacturers
and negotiate with them and then distribute
to the states. Court also observed that the
society talks about the centralisation of the
procurement and the decentralisation of the
distribution and the government has given
50% quota to the states. J. D.Y. Chandrachud
questioned that whether it implies that
leaving it to the vaccine manufacturers to
decide which state gets how much and can
this question of equity be left to the private
sector. Hence, the Court held that the pricing
and distribution cannot be given to the
manufacturers.
21
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
Electricity Sector
16. M/s. Southern Ferro Ltd. v. State of
Karnataka and Ors. W.P. No. 105054 / 2017
(GM-KEB)
 When Consumer Purchases Electricity
From Open Access Source, Electricity Tax
has to be Paid on that fixed Rate by which
the consumer had bought the electricity.
Brief Facts: This petition was filed under Art. 226
of the Constitution of India praying to
quash the impugned demand note passed
by the Assistant Executive Engineer as
unconstitutional. A demand to pay a sum of
Rs. 94,47,534/- being a demand for payment
of tax on electricity consumed by the
Petitioner is the subject matter of this case.
Petitioner, used to supply energy from the
energy exchange every month which is called
as purchase of electricity from Open Access
Source along with HESCOM. (Hubli Electricity
Supply Company Ltd.) Contention of the
Petitioner was that price paid for purchase
of electricity through Open Access Source is
different than the price paid by it for the for
the electricity sold to it by the licensee i.e.
HESCOM. Petitioner also contended that the
electricity tax that is to be paid should be
levied on the price at which it purchases be
it from the licensee or from the Open Access
Source. HESCOM had issued a demand
calling upon the Petitioner to pay tax on
electricity consumed at the rate of 6% on
the charges that HESCOM had fixed for the
sale of units. Aggrieved by this, the petition
was filed.
Issue: Whether electricity tax should be paid at the
rate from which unit it is taken when
electricity is used from Open Access Source?
Decision: The Karnataka High Court has held that
whenever a consumer purchases electricity
from Open Access Source, the tax on
electricity will be chargeable on the rate at
which consumer purchased electricity,
instead of the higher charges at which it is
supplied by a licnesee. Court further held
22 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
that if a consumer is to pay electricity tax
on charges higher than the one supplied by
the licensee, necessarily, whenever, the
licensee procures through Open Access
Source, electricity at a lower rate, the
charges would have to be calculated on the
rate at which the consumer had purchased
the electricity.
17. Mr. Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra v. M/s.
Amazon Development Centre India Pvt.
Ltd. First Appeal No. 492/ 2018
 Cancelling the confirmed order amounts
to Unfair Trade Practice.
Brief Facts: Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra
(Complainant) a law student, came across
an offer on Amazon India website for a laptop
of a certain company for Rs. 190/- as against
the product’s original price of Rs. 23,499/-.
He placed the order for the same and also
received an e-mail confirmation. However,
he received a phone call from Amazon’s
customer care department saying his order
stands cancelled due to ‘pricing issues’. He
tried to contact the customer care services
of the Respondent Company, however, no
result came out. Then he issued a legal
notice for which the Respondent company
did not respond. Then he moved to District
Commission Odisha and filed a complaint.
His complaint was allowed and he was
awarded compensation of Rs. 10,000/-.
However, he filed an appeal before State
Commission praying for enhancement of
compensation.
Issue: Whether cancelling the confirmed order
through online is unfair trade practice?
Decision: The Commission held that when there is
advertisement made for offer placed the OP
who is a reputed Online Shopping Website
and made offer as per the materials available
on record and the Complaint placed the order
and same has been confirmed, the
agreement is complete between the parties.
It observed that had there been cancellation
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
before receipt of conformation, the matter
would have been considered otherwise. It
also held that when the concerned seller was
allowed at the e-commerce website’s
platform, the latter’s responsibility cannot be
lost sight of. The Commission rejected
Amazon’s contention that the agreement was
with a third party and that it was not privy to
the contract between the student and the
laptop retailer. Then the Commission held
Amazon India guilty of ‘unfair trade practice’
for retracting an offer for sale of laptop at
Rs. 190/-, after issuing a confirmation
receipt.
Advertisement
18. Francis Vadakkan v. The Proprietor and
Ors., CC 345 / 2012
 Brand Ambassador or endorser can be
held liable for false claims through
Advertisements.
Brief Facts: The Complainant bought the cream viz.
Dhathri Hair Cream for the first time in
January 2012 for Rs. 376/- after seeing the
advertisement in which Anoop Menon
promised that the use of the product for six
weeks will assure lush hair growth. Though
he used the cream, no improvement
happened. He complained that he was
ridiculed by his friends and family for
purchasing the product. Feeling humiliated,
he approached the forum for Rs. 5 lakh
compensation alleging ‘deficiency in service’
by the Opposite Parties. However, Mr. Anoop
Menon admitted that he has never used the
product and that he has only used the hair
oil prepared by his mother. In this
background consumer complaint was filed
before Thrissur Consumer Redressal Forum.
Issue: Whether Brand Ambassador of a product can
promote false claims?
Direction: After considering the argument, the
Forum held that the endorser/brand
ambassador is liable for making false claims
endorsing a hair cream product without
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
ascertaining its effectiveness. It is thus clear
that the brand ambassador appeared in the
advertisement without even using the
product, the forum noted in the order. It was
also observed by the court that the
manufacturer could not deliver the result of
the product as claimed by him. The Forum
observed that it is thus clear that the brand
ambassador appeared in the advertisement
without even using the product, the forum
noted in the order. It was also observed by
the court that the manufacturer could not
deliver the result of the product as claimed
by him.
19. Rajendra Ambhore v. Union of India, Crl.
W.P. No. 469 of 2015
 Advertisement / sale of articles claiming
they have miraculous or supernatural
properties is illegal.
Brief Facts: The Petitioner, during March 2015,
came across advertisements on TV channels
and the advertisements were propagating
that there were special, miraculous and
supernatural properties / qualities in
Hanuman ChalisaYantra, which the
advertiser was selling. The purpose of the
advertisement was to promote the sale of
said Yantra. It was contended that it was a
false propaganda and the propaganda was
made to exploit the persons, who are
superstitious by nature and to exploit them.
There was a propaganda that by using
aforesaid Yantra, the businessmen who were
making losses had started making huge
profits, the persons who were not having
employment had got employment, the
persons who had lost hope to make career
had made career in service, the students had
improved their performance, sick persons
had recovered from illness and the Yantra
had brought happiness to the persons, who
were grieved. It was contended that false
propaganda was made that entire Hanuman
Chalisa was written on Yantra in Germany
and each letter written would last lifelong.
23
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
In the advertisement made on TV channels
the price of Yantra was given as Rs. 4,900/-
and it was advertised that this was
concessional rate. Along with this, some
celebrities shared their views on the yantra
which was telecasted in the said
advertisement. Believing this, the Petitioner
placed an order for the said yantra. However,
nothing has happened as mentioned in the
advertisement. Aggrieved by this, the
Petitioner had made representations to
Prime Minister and Police to prevent such
advertisements. However, he filed a case
and challenged such advertisements.
Issue: Whether advertisements which propagates
such articles are legal?
Decision: The Court observed the arguments and
held that the propagation for sale by
advertisement of any article by giving it name
as Yantra or otherwise, by attaching the
name of any God to such article including
the name of Lord Hanuman or any Baba with
representation that these articles have
special, miraculous and supernatural
LEGISLATION UPDATE ! !
1. The Hallmarking of Gold Jewellery and Gold
Artefacts (Amendment) Order, 2021
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
Public Distribution, Government of India,
in exercise of the powers conferred under
sub-section (3) of Section 14 read with
sub-section (2) and (3) of Section 15 and
sub-section (1) and (2) of section 16 read
with section 17 and sub section (3) of section
25 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act,
2016 (11 of 2016) after consultation with the
Bureau of Indian Standards, has made the
above Order on 01.06.2021.
This Order substitutes the terminology
‘1st day of June’ with ‘16th day of June’ in
clause 1, in sub section (2) of the Hallmarking
24 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
properties/qualities and making represen-
tation that these articles will help human
being to become happy, to make progress in
business, to make progress in profession, to
make advancement in career, to make
improvement in performance in education,
to get recovery from any disease etc., is
illegal. The Court examined the case through
the lens of provisions of the Maharashtra
Prevention and Eradication of Human
Sacrifices and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori
Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013. On
perusal of the Black Magic Act, the Court
held that the definition of propagation,
quoted already, shows that advertisement
of present nature is covered by the
definition. Section 3 of the Black Magic Act
prohibits not only commission of act of black
magic, evil practices etc., but also
propagation, promotion of such practices
and magic. Section 3(2) of this Act shows
that abetment of such propaganda is also
an offence. Thus, TV channels, which
telecast such advertisement also become
liable under Section 3 of the Black Magic Act.
of Gold Jewellery and Gold Artefacts Order,
2020.
2. The Legal Metrology (Government
Approved Test Centre) Rules, 2021
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
Public Distribution, Government of India, in
exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
sections (1) read with clause (n), (o) and (p)
of sub-section (2) of section 52 of the Legal
Metrology Act, 2009 (1 of 2010) has enacted
the above Rules on 01.02.2021.
This Rules has added clause 17 to the Legal
Metrology (Government Approved Test
Centre) Rules, 2013 which provides that
accredited laboratories for calibration of
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
weights and measures which are in
conformity with the conditions specified in
sub-rule (3) of rule 5 shall be eligible to be
notified as Government Approved Test Centre
subject to compliance of the provisions of
the Act.
3. The Consumer Protection (E-Commerce)
(Amendment) Rules, 2021
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
Public Distribution, Government of India, in
exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
clause (zg) of sub-section (2) of section 101
of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (35 of
2019), has amended the above Rules on
17.05.2021.
This Rules substituted rule 4, for sub-rule (1)
as: “(1) where an e-commerce entity is a
company incorporated under the Companies
Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or under the Companies
Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) or a foreign company
covered under clause (42) of section 2 of the
Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) or an
office, branch or agency outside India owned
or controlled by a person resident in India
WEB ALERT !
RailMadad’- https://railmadad.indianrailways.gov.in/madad/final/home.jsp and
Mobile Application
(A Web Portal and Mobile Application for grievance related to Railway services-
initiated by Ministry of Railways.)
1. What is this?
RailMadad is an easy and effective portal for the
grievances related to railway services. RailMadad
is part of the Railway Passenger Grievance
Redressal and Management System (RPGRAMS) of
Indian Railways. RailMadad (Mobile Application for
Desired Assistance During Travel) App is to lodge
any complaint or suggestion relating to train or
station via online. It has unprecedented reach,
speed and efficiency. RailMadad can be accessed
by any railway customer (passenger, parcel or
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
as provided in sub-clause (iv) of clause (v) of
section 2 of the Foreign Exchange
Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999), it shall
appoint a nodal officer or an alternate senior
designated functionary who is resident in
India, to ensure compliance with the
provisions of the Act or the rules made
thereunder”.
UPCOMING LEGISLATION
1. Proposed Consumer Protection
(E-Commerce) Rules, 2020
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and
Public Distribution, Government of India has
notified the Consumer Protection
(E-Commerce) Rules, 2020on 23rd July 2020
in exercise of the powers conferred by
sub-clause (zg) of sub-section (1) of section
101 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (35
of 2019). The Ministry has sought for the
views/comments/suggestions on the said
proposed Amendment within 6th July, 2021.
This proposed Amendment widens the duties
and liabilities of the e-commerce entities and
seller of the goods/services.
freight customer) who has a grievance with service
delivery of Indian Railways (inside or outside India).
RailMadad provides real-time assistance and
grievance redressal for about 8000+ stations and
12000+ trains. As the system is integrated with
National Train Enquiry System (NTES), it sends
alerts to the concerned field unit directly responsible
for providing relief. Efforts are made to redress real-
time complaints, both on the train and the station
itself. It has been awarded Silver under Category II
of National e-Governance Awards – ”Excellence in
25
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
providing Citizen-centric Delivery”. This award was
conferred during the 23rd National Conference on
e-Governance which was held in Mumbai on 7-
8th Feb, 2020.  corruption/bribery etc.
2. Objective
RailMadad Portal has been developed to enable
railway passengers to lodge a complaint or give
suggestion through online, App or SMS and facility
to track live status of complaints also provide
feedback based on their satisfaction with the
resolution. The objective of this portal is to enhance
experience of railway passengers with swift and
satisfactory resolution of complaints. The objective
of the mobile application is to help in raising
complaints even to the field officers of the division.
3. How consumer can access?
Customers can access RailMadad through
RailMadad no. 139, Web, App, SMS, Social media
& Manual Dak. Rail Madad no. 139 itself subsumes
over 15 Helplines, thereby giving the customers
the comfort of a single Helplines for all needs. Non-
smart phone users can call 139 * to talk to call
centre executives directly, who guides him/her in
lodging grievance. It is also possible to lodge a
complaint through IVRS (Interactive Voice
Response System). This facility is available in
12 languages. All those users having access to
telephone and internet have both immediate and
direct access to RailMadad. There is no insistence
on a Smartphone; an ordinary phone user can also
access round-the-clock RailMadad services by
dialling 139. The Remaining group of users can
avail services through manual desk wherein they
can register complaints manually.
4. Types of grievances
Consumers can report two types of complaints in
this portal viz. complaints related to train and
complaints related to station. Complaints related
to train would include punctuality of the train,
coach cleanliness, coach maintenance, availability
of water, bed, electricity, food, security in the train,
behaviour of staff etc. Complaints related to station
would include cleanliness of waiting room,
26 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
platforms, overcharging of food, quality of food,
refund of tickets, complaints on unreserved and
reserved ticketing, complaints on luggage or parcel,
In the home page of the website, one can find
different compartments for registering the
complaints viz. train complaint, station complaint,
freight/parcel enquiry, track your concern and
suggestion.
5. How to file cases?
Consumer can file cases in three methods:
1. Registration via Mobile Application/Web
 Open RailMadad App/URL
 Then one has to Login to the account, in case
of no account, one has to create an account
giving basic information like name, mail id or
contact number and then can access the page.
 After this mobile number or mail id has to be
provided in order to get the OTP. The OTP will
be valid only for 15 minutes.
 After registering the account, one has to select
the type of complaint which has to be
registered. For complaints related to train, one
should provide information regarding date of
the journey and PNR number. Then one has to
select the type and sub type of the complaint
mentioned in the website. Complainant can
give the document for evidence purpose. Then
complainant can give the description of the
complaint. Lastly consumer can submit his
complaint.
 For complaints related to station, one has to
select the type and sub type of the complaint
followed by the date of the incident. Then
complaint description has to be given.
 For complaints on tracking the train or any
other issue, one has to submit the reference
number.
2. Registration via SMS
 Passenger can send SMS to 139- type MADAD
space type the complaint and can send.
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
3. Registration via Phone Call helpline no.139.
 Complaint can be registered through the
helpline no. 139 and following are the options
available for this number:
 Press 1 for  security and  medical  emergency,
which connects to a customer care executive.
 Press 2 for general railway enquiry, and in the
sub-menu, all the information regarding arrival
or departure of the train, PNR status, system
ticket cancellation, ticket booking,
accommodation, ticket price, wake up alarm
facility, meal booking, destination alert,
wheelchair booking can be obtained.
 Press 4 for general complaints.
 Press 5 for vigilance related complaints.
 Press 6 for Parcel and Goods related queries.
 Press 7 for IRCTC operated trains queries.
 Press 9 for the status of complaints.
 Press * (asterisk)  symbol  for  talking  to  call
centre executive.
6. How to track the status of the complaint?
The passengers can track the status of their
complaint by clicking upon track your complaint and
then provide reference number.
BOOKS ALERT
1. Sarah Brown, ‘The regulation
of consumer credit : A transatlantic analysis’
Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA : Edward
Elgar Publishing, [2019]
2. Thomas Wilhelmsson, ‘Consumer law’,
Cheltenham, UK ; Northampton, MA : Edward
Elgar Publishing Limited, [2019]
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
7. How complaints are resolved?
RailMadad generates a unique Complaint
Registration Number (CRN) which is shared
transparently with the Complaint (as an
acknowledgement) as well as with the Public
Grievance (PG) managers. This keeps everyone on
the same page and reduces ambiguity as tracking
is possible for each complaint. In RailMadad,
grievances are sent directly to the field unit,
hence, eliminate ‘delaying’ in the first stage itself.
As a by-product, it also substantially mitigates
manpower required to redress complaints.
RailMadad uses other Indian Railways software to
automatically alert the nearest Divisional Control
Centre. This greatly enhances the effectiveness of
the system. Complaints can now be directly sent
to the concerned Control Office under which the
train is running. In RailMadad, almost 94%
complaints get resolved within 2-3 hours. Also, due
to its ease of accessibility, the volume handled
every day in Rail Madad (over 3000 grievances per
day) is double of that in earlier systems, over 90%
of which get resolved in less than 2 hrs.
8. What can a consumer do if the complaint is
not resolved?
In RailMadad, if a complaint is not redressed by
concerned Divisional Control Centre within the pre-
defined expected redressal time, it gets
automatically escalated to concerned Officer and
then to the Divisional head.
4. Richard E Susskind, ‘Online Courts and the
Future of Justice’ Richard Susskind, First
Edition. Publisher: Oxford : Oxford University
Press, [2019]
5. Fairgrieve Duncan, Goldberg Richard,
‘Product Liability ’, Third edition.
Publisher: Oxford, United Kingdom; New York,
NY, United States of America : Oxford
University Press, [2020]
27
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
ARTICLES ALERT
1. Mark Kenkre,'A watershed moment for
consumer protection', Law Society's Gazette,
118(17), 2021 P: 25.
2. Caroline Cauffman, Oreste Pollicino and
Agustin Reyna,'How EU consumer law can
contribute to the great post-pandemic
recovery?', Journal of European Consumer and
Market Law, 10(2), 2021, PP:45-47
3. Guido Comparato, 'Untying payment accounts
from mortgage loans to unleash consumer
mobility', Journal of European Consumer and
Market Law, 10(2), 2021, PP: 71-75
4. Evelyne Terryn, 'The new consumer agenda:
a further step toward sustainable
consumption?', Journal of European Consumer
and Market Law, 10(1), 2021, PP: 1-3
5. Thom van Mierlo, 'First experiences with
European consumer self-regulation dialogue:
twice successful', Journal of European
Consumer and Market Law, 10(1), 2021, PP:
33-35
6. Sue Chandler, 'Improving quality information
available for consumers', CILEx, Spr, Internet,
2021.
7. Sophie Stoneham, 'Trade mark decisions:
Gustopharma Consumer Health SL v EUIPO (T-
883/19) (GC)'Chartered Institute of Patent
Agents Journal, 50(3), 2021, P: 47.
8. Fidelma White, 'A new chapter in consumer
sale of goods law: Directive 2019/771 on Sale
of Goods', Commercial Law Practitioner,
28(5),2021, PP: 90-96.
9. James Kane, 'Jurisdiction - consumer contracts
- Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012' Commercial
Law Practitioner, 28(4), 2021, PP: 79-80.
10. Martin Canny and Marcello Pietrocola, 'The
Consumer Insurance Contracts Act 2019: pre-
contract representations and disclosure
obligations-a new era for insurance law?'
Commercial Law Practitioner, 28(1), 2021,
PP: 3-6.
28 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
11. Inge Graef, 'Consumer sovereignty and
competition law: from personalization to
diversity', Common Market Law Review, 2021,
58(2), PP: 471-504.
12. Andy Denson, Elizabeth Dunn and Luke
Wilcox.F., 'Limiting liability in consumer terms:
High Court rules in favour of online customer
in £1.7 million dispute with Betfred.' Finance
& Credit Law, 2021, PP: 6-8.
13. Nedim Malovic,'EU General Court tackles
notion of "average consumer" when goods/
services are aimed at both specialised and
everyday consumers', Journal of Intellectual
Property Law & Practice, 16(2), 2021, PP: 102-
103.
14. Firat Cengiz, 'The conflict between market
competition and worker solidarity: moving
from consumer to a citizen welfare standard
in competition law', Legal Studies, 41(1), 2021,
PP: 73-90.
15. Chun Sang Wong and Sze Lam Chan, 'At the
junction of consumer protection: dual role of
data protection in EU law', London School of
Economics Law Review, 6, 2021, PP: 105-122.
16. Magdalena Kucko. Maastricht J, 'The right to
double compensation where the re-routed
flight suffers a long delay - upholding high
standards of EU consumer protection',
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law, 28(1), 2021, PP: 143-152.
17. DLA Piper, 'Consumer contracts: winnings from
online casino. PLC Magazine, 2021, 32(5), P:45.
18. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, 'Settlement
agreements: subject to Consumer Rights Act
1974'. PLC Magazine, 32(3), 2021, P: 48.
19. Bird & Bird, 'Trade marks: targeting consumers
on website', PLC Magazine, 32(2), 2021, PP:
68-69.
20. DLA Piper, 'Consumer rights: assignment and
jurisdiction', PLC Magazine, 32(1), 2021, P: 51.
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU

CALL FOR PAPERS

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE (IJCLP)
VOL X (2021)

About International Journal on Consumer Law III. Summary of our submission guidelines
and Practice (IJCLP): The journal welcomes contributions from
academicians, practitioners, students of law
The National Law School of India University (NLSIU)
and allied fields.
is the first National Law University to be
established in India as well as one of the first in Theme: Contemporary Issues in Consumer
the country to offer the five-year integrated Protection
undergraduate law degree. It also offers post Sub Themes:
graduate law degree and doctorate law degree. For
more than 30 years the University has irrefutably  Critical Analysis of Consumer Protection Act,
remained a leader in the field of legal education in 2019 in comparison with developed
the country. The International Journal on Consumer countries,
Law and Practice (IJCLP) is a Blind-Peer- reviewed,  International Consumer Protection
law journal published annually by NLSIU under the Framework & Policy,
aegis of the Chair on Consumer Law and Practice
 New Age Contemporary Issues &
(CLAP), NLSIU. Previous issues of the Journal have
Challenges,
featured contributions by Hon. Justice A.K.Sikri
(Hon’ble Judge, Supreme Court of India), Mr. HC  Role of Regulatory Authorities in Consumer
Mult Norbert Reich (Emeritus Professor, Bremen Protection,
University, Germany), Ms.Cristina Poncibò  Comparative study of Product Liability in
(Associate Professor, Comparative Private Law, India with developed Countries,
University of Turin, Italy), Ms. Laura Zoboli
(Assistant Professor European Economic Law,  Technological Advancements in Protection
University of Warsaw, Poland), Mr. James P Nehf and
(Professor and Cleon H Foust Fellow, Robert H  Enforcement of Consumer Rights.
McKinney of Law Indiana University), Ms.Gail The sub-themes listed above are merely
Pearson (Professor, University of Sydney, Australia), indicative and not exhaustive.
etc. IJCLP seeks to provide a forum through articles
for engaging in discussion on various National and Word Limit
International Issues on Consumer Protection Laws.  Articles and Research Papers with abstract
Following the Nine successful volume of the Journal (6,000-8,000 words inclusive of footnotes).
and in continuance of the endeavour to encourage
academic discourse and legal scholarship, the  Essay (3,000-4,000 words inclusive of
Board of Editors invites submission for the Tenth footnotes).
Volume. The Journal welcomes contributions from  Case Comment, Legislative Briefs (2,500-
academicians, practitioners of law, students of law 3,000 words inclusive of footnotes).
and allied fields.  Note (2,500 words inclusive of footnotes).
II. Timeline for Submission  Book Review (2,000 words inclusive of
Deadline for submission is 30th March, 2022. footnotes)

Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 29
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU

IV. Format of Submission: be in Times New Roman, Font Size 10 with

1) The submission shall not contain the name
of the author or institutional affiliation or
any other identification mark. Submission
shall be sent in .doc or .docx format only.
2) A separate cover letter in (.doc) or (.docx)
format containing particulars of the
author(s) and the submission is to be sent
along with the submission.
A cover letter should include –
Single Line Spacing.
4) All citations should be placed in footnotes
(and not endnotes) and shall conform to the
Oxford Standard for Citation of Legal
Authorities (4th edn, 2012).
5) The submission should contain a disclaimer
to the effect that the piece is original and
has not been published or is under
consideration, for publication, elsewhere.

(i) Title of Submission, 6) All submissions are subject to Plagiarism

check.
(ii) Sub-theme Chosen (if any),
7) All submissions go through an initial round
(iii) Abstract (not exceeding 300 words), of review by the editorial board and the
(iv) Name of the Author & amp; Co-Author selected pieces are subsequently sent for
(Onlyone Co-author is permitted) peer review, before finalization for
publication.
(v) Designation,
(vi) Institutional Affiliation, V. How do I Submit?

(vii) Contact Information and Address for Only electronic submissions are accepted.
Correspondence. Kindly submit your submission on this
Google form along with the cover letter, and
3) The body of the submission should be in resume on or before 30th March 2022 for it
Times New Roman, with Font Size 12 and to be considered for volume X. Please feel
Line Spacing of 1.5. The footnotes should free to contact us at ijclp@nls.ac.in for any
queries.

30 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA IN CONSUMER LAW & PRACTICE (PGDCLP)
National Law School of India University [NLSIU],
Nagarbhavi, Bengaluru-560 072
NLSIU invites applications for one year Post
Graduate Diploma in Consumer Law & Practice
(PGDCLP) - Distance Mode. The PGDCLP draws
from the rich insights gained by Chair on Consumer
Laws and Practice (CLAP), at the NLSIU, instituted
by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food &
Public Distribution Department of Consumer
Affairs, Government of India, undertake outreach
programmes in the form of workshops, seminars,
publications and training programme for
academicians, professionals, government official,
consumer forum members, and NGOs. The Chair
has designed and started Post Graduate Diploma
Course in Consumer Law and Practice for discipline
of any graduate with a view to strengthening
consumer protection in India.
Eligibility for Admission: Graduate Degree in any
discipline from a recognized University. The medium
of instruction will be English.
Admission Procedure: Candidates intending to
enrol for admission shall submit the duly filled in
application form along with the attested copies of
the Provisional Degree certificates and the fee
prescribed before the last date of admission. Soon
after completion of the admission process the
confirmation of admission will be sent to the
candidates.
Duration: One Academic Year. (Maximum duration
to complete the course is five years).*
Course Papers:
Paper I: Introduction to Law & Legal Systems
Paper II: Development of Consumer Protection
Law
Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Paper III: Product Liability and Service Providers
Liability
Paper IV: Regulatory Authorities, Mediation &
Drafting
Paper V: Dissertation
Resource Materials: Reading Material
Compendiums
Requirements for fulfilment of the Course:
 Every candidate has to appear for
examination infour papers. Each paper
carries equal marks.
 Candidates are supposed to secure at least
50% marks in each paper.
 Every candidate shall work on a Research.
Project (which will be considered as
Paper V)
*Note: Post Graduate Diploma is 1 year course.
Every candidate admitted to the course shall pay
the prescribed fees at the time of admission. If a
candidate is required to continue the course beyond
one academic year because of his/her non
fulfilment of the prescribed requirements for the
award of the degree, he/she willbe permitted to
continue for the subsequent two academic years
by paying a continuation fee as prescribed for each
year. At the end of the fifth academic year if the
candidate fails to fulfil all the requirements for the
award of the degree, the admission stands
automatically cancelled.
Examination Scheme: Candidates are expected to
write 100 marks in class examination for each paper
31
 CHAIR ON CONSUMER LAW AND PRACTICE, NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU
(I-IV). Annual exams will be held in June. Grading
system is followed for evaluation of performance.
Minimum B Grade (50%) is required to pass a paper.
A minimum Cumulative Grade Point Average
(CGPA) of 3.00 is necessary to complete the
course. Diploma students are expected to write a
Dissertation on the suggested topic for Paper V.
The Dissertation would carry 80 marks. Students
are expected to take an oral exam-viva voce, which
will be based on the Dissertation they write. The
viva voce would carry 20 marks. VIVA VOCE will
be held at the respective examination centres
from where the candidate will be appearing.
Submission of Dissertation is one month before the
examination.
Examination Schedule: The DED conducts
examination twice a year: 1) Annual Examination
in the month of June 2) Supplementary Examination
in the month of December/January. As of now the
examination is held at Bengaluru, Pune, Delhi and
Kolkatta.
The address and location of examination centres
will be provided in the examination schedule which
may be downloaded from the website
<ded.nls.ac.in?page_id=803> by April for the
Annual examination and by October for the
32 Sponsored by Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution, Department of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi
Supplementary examination.
The Fee for the course is Rs. 20,000/-.
Application form can be obtained in person (or) by
writing to The Coordinator, Distance Education
Department (DED), National Law School of India
University, Nagarbhavi, Bengaluru – 560 072, along
with a Demand Draft for Rs.1500/- drawn in favour
of the Registrar, NLSIU, payable at Bengaluru.
Application form can also be downloaded from
http://ded.nls.ac.in or submit the application and
make payment online.
For further details please contact:
The Coordinator
Distance Education Department (DED)
National Law School of India University (NLSIU)
Nagarbhavi, Bengaluru 560 242 (old pin 560
072)
Karnataka
T: +91 80 23160524 / 23160529
F: +91 80 23160529
Email: ded@nls.ac.in
URL: www.ded.nls.ac.in
 Prof. (Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, par cipated in Karnataka Coali on mee ng
for Tobacco Control Cell (KCTC) organized by State Tobacco Control
Cell, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of
Karnataka, Chaired by Member Secretary, State Tobacco Control Cell,
held on 17th February, 2021.
Prof.(Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, was invited as a Panellist on the theme
“Laws & Enforcement” for the webinar on 'World No Tobacco Day'
organized by CFTFK , in collabora on with Founda on for
Sustainable Health India FSHI, Bangalore held on 31st May, 2021.

Organized Na onal Webinar & Released a Report on “Framework for Implementa on of Tobacco Vendor Licensing in India” released by
Dr. L Swasthicharan, Addi onal Director General, Na onal Tobacco Control Cell, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of India,
organised by Na onal Law School of India University, Bangalore in associa on with Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) held on 25th February, 2021.

Prof.(Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, was Invited as Panellist for “SETTLE 2021” on the News Paper Add. “Amend COTPA to make curbs on tobacco more
topic “The Prospects and Challenges as Online Media on becomes more effec ve” has appeared in The Pioneer, today published on
Real” organized by Se le 2021 Organizing Commi ee, held on 09th January, 2021.
19th March, 2021 along with Chi u Nagarajan (ODR Specialist) Pranjal Sinha
(CEO, SAMA) Dr Suni Augus ne (GM, The Leela Group) Aparna Mukerjee
(Mediator and lawyer)-moderator.

Organized “Law Enforcers Training Workshop on Implementa on of the
Prohibi on of Electronic Cigare es (Produc on, Manufacture, Import,
Export, Transport, Sale, Distribu on, Storage and Adver sement) Act,
2019” Consumer Law & Prac ce, Na onal Law School of India University
(NLSIU), Bangalore in associa on with Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
(CTFK) held on 6th May, 2021.
Prof.(Dr.) Ashok R Pa l, was invited as a panelist for “Na onal Consulta on on
Enforcement of ENDs ban in India” Organized by Strategic Ins tute of Public
Health Educa on and Research (SIPHER) in collabora on with E-Resource
Centre for Tobacco Control (E-RCTC) under Department of Community
Medicine & School of Public Health, PGIMER Chandigarh and The Union South-
East Asia (The Union), held on 16th June, 2021.
 Na onal Webinar on “Misleading Adver sement under The Consumer Protec on Act, 2019” inaugurated by Ms. Nidihi Khare, Chief Commissioner,
Central Consumer Protec on Authority (CCPA) & Addi onal Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, followed by the
panellist Prof. (Dr.) V. Keshav Rao, Vice-Chancellor, Na onal University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi,.Ms. Manisha Kapoor, Secretary General,
The Adver sing Standards Council of India (ASCI), Mumbai. Dr. Anita A. Pa l, Associate Professor, Ramaiah College of Law, Bengaluru &
Mr. Y.G. Murlidharan, Founder Trustee, Consumer Rights Educa on and Awareness Trust (CREAT), Bengaluru, organized by Chair on Consumer Law
and Prac ce, Na onal Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru, held on 15th March, 2021.

Resource Person for an awareness programme on “Protec on of E-Consumer under Consumer Protec on Act, 2019”
organized by Ramaiah College of Law, Bangalore, held on 24th March, 2021.

Mee ng & Discussion with Ms. Saroja, CAG, Tamil Nadu, Om Prakash Dr. Srinivas Ravindra, Execu ve Director, Centre for Sustainable
Bera, Principal Consultant, Cardio Vascular Health, Global Health Development, Bangalore & Mr. Thandava Murthy, Retd. BBMP Officer,
Advocacy Incubator, Mr. Ranjit Singh, Senior Advocate, New Delhi, consulted & visited Chair on Consumer Law & Prac ce, NLSIU, Bangalore
discussion on Transfat held on 12th May, 2021. discussed to prepare the report about the study on Implementa on of
Food Safety Laws in Karnataka, on 20th March, 2021.

*CLAP Face Book - https://www.facebook.com/Chair-on-Consumer-Law-and-Practice- 1835358613423523/

*Twitter- https://twitter.com/ConsumerChair
*Linked in- https://www.linkedin.com/in/chair-on-consumer-law-and-practice-b51785104/
*IJCLP- https://clap.nls.ac.in/?page_id=205
*PGDCLP- https://online.nls.ac.in/programmes/postgraduate-diploma-in-consumer-law-practice-pgdclp/