CONSUMERISM IN INDIA

PRESENTED BY:AMIT KUMAR

ANKITA BHATNAGARDEEPTI TIWARI

GURDEEP SANDHUHITENDRA VER SINGH

JASKIRAT SINGH JOHAR

EVALUATION OF THE CONCEPT

“Consumer is the king”- mere expression. Actual practice is different. Domination of “sellers market”. Monopolistic situation- increasing prices. Reacting against exploitation- need of the hour. Caveat Emptor replaced by “Let The Seller

Beware”

Cont’d

INDIAN CONTEXT Increasing competition- buyers market. Many products. Eg: Soft drinks- variety of brand names.

Two wheeler industry. Consumerism in vulnerable position.

Consumer Surveys

Recently conducted- Consumer being cheated to Rs 2000 Cr per year on short weights & measures.

Spurious drugs in the market. Adulteration of drugs- Permanent disablement & mass

deaths. Consumer Council Of India- large scale adulteration in

petrol, diesel oil etc Disablement of 40% trucks & tractors in N. India. Consumer needs to be protected in large majority of

daily products

CONSUMER OFTEN TAKEN FOR A RIDE

1.) Large no. of units produce match boxes. However large % of match sticks do not light.

2.) Domestic Airlines considers consumers interest as coming last & more concerned about profitability & employees convenience.

Raising fares- Enjoys monopoly situation.

3.) Television sets & consumer durables sold without proper infra for after sales services.

LEGAL MEASURES BY INDIAN GOVT Packaged

Commodity(Regulation)Order,1975 Manufacturers to display: labels & packages. Date of manufacturing. The ceiling price. The weight contents. Complete address of manufacturer.

CONT’D

Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1974

Provided 6 years imprisonment as the maximum punishment.

Amendment made to it in 1976: Life Imprisonment & Rs 5000 fine. In case adultreated food considered either

injurious to health or likely to cause death.

CONT’D A Central Consumer Council-

Chairmenship of Mr. T.A Pai as an apex body.

A National Consumer Protection Council. To act as a watchdog ensuring price stability

& quality control. Consumers formed several Consumer

guidance association: Eg: Consumer Guidance Society Of

Bombay testing consumer goods.

A LONG WAY TO GO….

Consumer movement still not strong enough. Consider CGSI, Bombay, which is few

hundred in a city with a population of 8 million.

The gravity of the situation is demanding participation of more people.

Otherwise there will only be stray voices in the dark.

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986

Most powerful legislation. Aimed to protect consumers rights particularly “right to

redress”. Official legal machinery- to listen to the complaints & seek

protection. Gives right to hand over complaint to consumer

organization. The Act can even be used against govt which run utilities

like: Telephone deptt. Nationalised banks. Electricity board.

CASE UNDER CONSUMER FORUM

The case of the Complainant was that he being an unemployed youth holding a Route Permit of Autorickshaw, purchased one Diesel Vikram (3-wheeler Model and colour 410 D/Auto/Yellow & Black) from the dealer, the OP No.1 M/s Manik Motors as per Invoice for Rs. 1,01,000/- (payment by cash of Rs. 21,000/- and by DD of Rs. 80,000/- taken as loan from the Co-operative Agricultural Rural Development Bank, Aliporeduar). But within 15 days from the date of purchase, the engine plate of the Autorickshaw broke down, lube oil leaked with excess consumption and the engine got heated and the problem over starting of the vehicle developed. The Complainant at once informed the OP No. 1 over telephone of such problems arising in the vehicle but OP No.1 did not take any step. Such negligence on the part of the OP constituted deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice particularly when the Complainant suffered financial loss and various hazards as a result. Hence, he brought his complaint before the Consumer Forum praying for an order for refund of consideration money with interest and compensation for a sum of Rs. 2,09,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs. 2,000/-.

The Forum after hearing both and considering the materials on record adduced by both the sides, came to the conclusion that there had been deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and therefore, they were liable to either replace the Autorickshaw in dispute by a new and defect free one or, in the alternative, they would refund the consideration money which they took from the Complainant as price of the Autorickshaw in dispute to the Comp

THANK YOU