The Consumer Protection Act has just celebrated its silver jubilee. Though more than 660 consumer forums are functioning in the country at various levels, braving poor infrastructure and rising workload, the law has started a kind of revolution. It has instilled hope in the success of grass roots reforms like the right to information and the right to education.
One bright side of the Act is that appeals to the Supreme Court are few and far between, unlike some other recent legislation like that of arbitration. Finance companies, hospitals and professionals have been sufficiently jolted to provide better services. Sellers of goods and services seem to have run short of new arguments. They have to resurrect old ones to carry their fight up the judicial ladder, from the district forum, the state commission, the national commission and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s first consumer judgment of this year showed how thin the line of arguments has become (National Seeds Corporation vs Madhusudan Reddy).
The state corporation, it would seem, has sowed the seeds of farmers’ suicides in its own way by selling duds. Many poor farmers who bought seeds of sunflower, castor, tomato, chilli and bitter gourd over the past decade had a bitter experience. They found that germination and growth of the plants were grossly faulty. They sued the corporation in the consumer forum, winning huge compensations. Undaunted, the corporation moved up to the Supreme Court, suffering defeats at each step.
The desperate arguments of the corporation reviving questions that have been decided many times over showed that the law has been well-drafted leaving few loopholes and has been liberally interpreted by courts.
The first argument was that the dispute over the quality of seeds should be settled under the machinery set up under the Seeds Act 1966. The court reiterated its stand that the consumer law is “in addition to, and not in derogation” of remedies available in other laws and an aggrieved person can choose the consumer forum despite alternative remedies.
Moreover, a farmer who lost his crop and money invested will gain nothing by punishing the guilty official under the Seeds Act. That law does not provide for compensation. The farmer needs compensation and it is available only from the consumer forum.
Another stock contention that sellers of goods and services raise is that the dispute should be resolved by arbitration according to the sale agreement. This, again, is a choice to be decided by the aggrieved person. It cannot be imposed on him by one party. In fact, the consumer law intends to relieve consumers from cumbersome arbitration proceedings and civil courts.
Another frequent argument heard in consumer forums is that the complainant bought goods for “commercial purpose” and therefore, he is not a “consumer” as defined in the Act. In this case, the farmers sell their crops in the market and, therefore, they bought seeds for commercial purposes. The consumer law is for those who buy goods only for their own use. Despite an amendment to the Act in 1993, this argument is routinely raised and shot down with equal ease by the forums. The court clarified in this case again that a farmer who bought the seeds for earning his livelihood is a “consumer”.
The last desperate argument is highly technical. When the farmer files a complaint, he should provide a sample of the defective seeds for testing in the laboratory. The court repelled this contention stating that an illiterate farmer cannot be expected to keep samples anticipating a consumer complaint. On the other hand, it was the duty of the corporation to follow rules and keep records of the seeds sold for three years. It had not done so. Similar arguments raised earlier by EID Parry Ltd and India Seed House in faulty seeds cases have been rejected.
Thus, the year has started off well for consumers. However, the downside of consumer law is that there are about 350,000 complaints pending in the forums at different levels. Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan top in arrears.
One main reason for this sorry state of affairs is the non-appointment of members of the forums by state governments. The choice of personnel is often caught in controversies and apathy. There were more than 350 vacant posts last year. As a result, instead of 90 days to dispose of complaints prescribed by law, it takes a few years to decide them at the district level itself.
Lack of infrastructure is another sordid story. Many forums are functioning in dilapidated buildings and lack adequate staff and even stationery. This is the subject of a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court. It was a PIL by “Common Cause” in the 1980’s that forced governments to set up the forums in the first place. This time the effort is to nudge the state governments to help the forums work well.
