No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Answer:
Case Law; Goutam Roy V/S Avalon Projects
CC No 1941 of 2018, Decided on 24.01.2023 (NC)
A landmark judgement National Commission (NCDRC)
Facts:
National commission while referring to number of SC cases on the issue relied upon section
74 of 1872 Contract Act that in case of breach of contract, actual damage is to be proved for
penalizing the other party. In such matters cancelling the booking flat or property by the
buyer, the property remains with builder only and there is hardly any loss to the builder
National commission ordered for forfeiture of 10% of the total sale cost of the property
Cases Referred:
Moula Bux V/S Union of India 1970 SC
Sirdar K B Ram Chandra Raj URS v/s SC 2015theory of actual damage as per section
74 of contract act
Answer:
Case Law ; Amit Gupta & Anr. Versus. M/S. Vatika Limited ( National Commission) Consumer Case No. 425 Of 2018
A landmark judgement National Commission (NCDRC)
Facts :
The OP sent the blank Builder Buyer Agreement to the complainants on 16.4.2015. Some of the terms and conditions contained in the said agreement were not acceptable to the complainants. Some of the objections raised by the complainants were as under:
Since the issues raised by the complainants were not addressed, they, vide email dated 06.12.2017 sought refund of the amount which they had paid to the OP along with interest.
Commission directed refund of the entire amount of Rs.37,05,892/ which the said complainant had paid to the OP, along with interest on that amount @ 9% per annum.
Answer:
Case Law: Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Govindan Raghavan
(2019) 5 SCC 725 decided on 2nd April 2019
Such wholly one-sided agreements were termed as unfair and were not approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Govindan Raghavan (2019) 5 SCC 725, decided on 2nd April 2019 which to the extent it is relevant reads as under:
“Incorporation of one-sided clauses in an agreement constitutes an unfair trade practice as per section 2®of consumer protection act. .”
Quoted law-Section 2 (r) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 defines ‘unfair trade practices’ in the following words :
“‘Unfair trade practice’ means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice …”, and includes any of the practices enumerated therein. The provision is illustrative, and not exhaustive.
Answer:
Case Law; Mr Dinesh R Humane& Mrs Ranjana D. humane v/s Piramal estate Pvt. Ltd
Decided on 16 March 2021
(RERA Estate Appellant Tribunal ,Maharashtra)
Held
“Transaction of sale and purchase of the flat is cancelled at initial stage Allottee Marely booked the flat and paid some money towards the booking on printed form. Thereafter there is no progressing of the transaction Parties never reached to execute agreement for sale. In this peculiar matter it cannot be ignored that the object of RERA is to protect interest of consumer, so whatever amount is paid by home buyer to the promoter should be refunded to the allottee on his withdrawal from the project”
Civil Appeal No. 2646 Of 2009 (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
Decided On 14.05.2024 (55 Pages Judgment)
J.Bela M. Trivedi & J Pankaj Mithal
Case Title:
Bar Of Indian Lawyers Through Its President Jasbir Singh Malik &Others
Bar Council Of India Through By Its Secretary Mr. S. Radhakrishnan
Mathias Appellant(S)
V/S
K. Gandhi Ps National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Anr. Respondent(S)
The present set of Appeals against the order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), New Delhi
In Revision Petition No.1392/2006,
Decided on 06.08.2007. [NEW DELHI; MAY 14th, 2024.
NCDRC held that
If there was any deficiency in service rendered by the Advocates/Lawyers, a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 would be maintainable
Counsels for the Appellants:
Senior Advocate Narender Hooda and
Advocate Jasbir Malik for Bar of Indian Lawyers,
Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta for Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association,
Senior advocate Guru Krishnakumar for the Bar Council of India,
senior advocate Manoj Swarup, for Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association,
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, & Senior Advocate Ramakrishnan Vira Raghavan for Bengaluru Bar Association
Whether a “Service” hired or availed of an Advocate would fall within the definition of “Service” contained in the C.P. Act, 1986/2019, so as to bring him within the purview of the said Act?
1) The Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils are invested with the disciplinary powers.
The professional misconduct if any, which includes cases of negligence is covered by the special law i.e., Advocates Act, 1961. Lawyers are bound by ethical and professional obligations Professionals are governed by their respective Councils like Bar Councils or Medical Councils also would not absolve them from their civil or criminal liability arising out of their professional misconduct or negligence. Hence The Advocates Act being special law would prevail over the CP Act so far as the conduct of Advocates are concerned.
As per Section 16 thereof, there are only two classes of Advocates, namely Senior Advocates and other Advocates
As per Section 29, there is only one class of persons entitled to practice the profession of law, namely Advocates,
As per Section 32 30, every advocate whose name is entered in the State roll is entitled as of right to practice in all Courts including the Supreme Court and before any Tribunal or any other authority or person before whom such advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force entitled to practice
The disciplinary powers for taking action against the Advocates and impose punishment for their misconduct have been conferred upon the State Bar Councils and Bar Council of India as the case may be under the Chapter V of the Advocates Act.
2) A unique feature which distinguishes an Advocate from other professional
An Advocate has a duty to the court and his peers, in addition to his duty to the client The legal profession is an extension of system of justice, and the success of judicial process depends on the independence of the Bar.
3) Code of conduct
The Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 (for short “the BCI Rules”), in Part VI Chapter II provide for the “Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette” to be observed by all the advocates under the Advocates Act, 1961 (for short “the 1961 Act”). In the Preamble to Chapter II, the BCI Rules provide as follows: “An advocate shall, at all times, comport himself in a manner befitting his status as an officer of the Court, a privileged member of the community, and a gentleman, bearing in mind that what may be lawful and moral for a person who is not a member of the Bar, or for a member of the Bar in his non-professional capacity may still be improper for an advocate
4) A professional cannot be treated equally or at par with a businessman or a trader or a service provider of products or goods,” (Justice Trivedi)
Professionals could not be called Businessmen or Traders, nor Clients or Patients be called Consumers. The terms ‘businesses or ‘trade’ having a commercial aspect involved, legal profession is the sole profession, where advocates have no control over their environment. The environment they work in is controlled by the presiding Judge.
In Indian Medical Association (supra) it is observed: – “In the matter of professional liability professions differ from other occupations”
5) Difference between Advocate -client relationship
There is a fundamental difference between the nature of professional-client relationship. The complexity of legal issues, and the diversity of legal contexts also would take the legal services rendered by the Advocates outside the purview of the services defined under the CP Act
6) The summary nature of proceeding under the consumer protection law would lead to speculative/vexatious claims
The legal profession is a noble profession and allowing consumer protection law to apply to the Advocates would open floodgates of unnecessary litigations and it would not be in the larger public interest to do so.
7) Advocates can be broadly classified into two categories based on the terms of their engagement and the nature of work being done by them for their clients –
(1) Advocates engaged by clients to conduct their cases and then represent them before any court (Contract of Personal Service)
(2) Advocates engaged by clients to provide their professional expertise for providing legal opinions, issuing legal notices, drafting agreements, etc. The clients outside the grounds of the court and outside the litigation process i.e., who are not engaged on the strength of a vakalatnama but engaged to provide legal services outside the court process, would come within the purview of a service provider, and any deficiency or shortcoming in the professional services rendered by such Advocates, completely outside the confines of the litigation process, would be covered under the CP Act.
The Advocates Act defines “Advocate” separately from “Legal Practitioner”
Advocate is included in the definition of “Legal Practitioner” but legal practitioner is not included in the definition of “Advocate.”
“Sec.2(1)(a) – “advocate” means an advocate entered in any roll under the provision of this Act;”
Section 2(1)(i) – “Legal Practitioner” means an advocate or vakil of any High Court, a pleader, mukhtar or revenue agent;”
8) The Legislature never intended to include the Professions or the services rendered by the Professionals within the purview of the CP Act 1986 as re-enacted in 2019,
There was not a whisper in the statement of objects and reasons either of the CP Act, 1986 or 2019 to include the Professions or the Services provided by the Professionals like Advocates, Doctors etc. The CP Act 1986 was repealed and the CP Act, 2019 came to be re-enacted. The statement of objects and reasons for re-enacting the said Act of 2019 reads as under: –
“The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986) was enacted to provide for better protection of the interests of consumers and for the purpose of making provision for establishment of consumer protection councils and other authorities for the settlement of consumer disputes, etc. The modern market place contains a plethora of products and services. The emergence of global supply chains, rise in international trade and the rapid development of e-commerce have led to new delivery systems for goods and services and have provided new options and opportunities for consumers. Equally, this has rendered the consumer vulnerable to new forms of unfair trade and unethical business practices.
we are of the opinion that neither the Professions nor the Professionals were ever intended to be brought within the purview of the CP Act either of 1986 or 2019.
CP Act intended to protect the consumer from exploitation by unscrupulous manufacturers and traders of consumer goods. three-tier fora comprising the District Forum, the State Commission and the National Commission came to be envisaged under the Act for redressal of grievances of consumers”
“To begin with the preamble of the Act, which can afford useful assistance to ascertain the legislative intention, it was enacted, ‘to provide for the protection of the interest of consumers.”
In order to assess whether the client exercises direct control over the Advocate, the Court cited several provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. One such concerned provision was Order III Rule 4, as per which a pleader cannot act in the Court for any person unless he/she is appointed by such person. Now, the document for appointing a pleader. The document used for the appointment of a pleader is known as “Vakala Nama”. The Court noted that by virtue of such “Vakalatnama,” advocates have certain duties, including the one to their client.
It is further stated “In my opinion it is impossible to lay down any rule of law distinguishing the one from the other. It is a question of fact to be decided by all the circumstances of the case. The greater the amount of direct control exercised over the person rendering the services by the person contracting for them the stronger the grounds for holding it to be a contract of service, and similarly the greater the degree of independence of such control the greater the probability that the services rendered are of the nature of professional services and that the contract is not one of service.”
In view of this above projection, the Court noted that “a considerable amount of direct control is exercised by the Client over the manner in which an Advocate renders his services during the course of his employment.”
After citing the above attributes, the Court concluded that Services of an advocate would come under the contract ‘of personal service’ thus, the same would stand excluded from the definition of Service as provided under section 2(42) of the Act.
“As a necessary corollary, a complaint alleging “deficiency in service” against Advocates practising Legal Profession would not be maintainable under the CP Act, 2019.,” the Court said.
In that view of the matter, we summarize our conclusions as under-
The most talked issue remained medical professional since inception of the act in 1986 till new act 2019 which were settled through number of SC judgments. A new turn came after enactment of new act in2019 when the issue was again raised before Kerala HC AND SC Re-affirms its stand on Healthcare service under Consumer law through its judgment in the case of Medicos Legal Action Group v Union of India|SLP (Civil) 19374/2021Decided on 22.4.2022.
FACTS: An organization “Medicos Legal Action Group”, had filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay as Public Interest Litigation No. 58 Of 2021 and prayed before the court to declare that services performed by healthcare service providers are not included within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019
SC HELD –
“We are of the clear opinion that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioning Trust, that the Hon’ble Minister having made certain statements in course of parliamentary debates on the Bill that preceded the 2019 Act, such statement is of little relevance. From the pleadings it is found that ‘health care’ was initially included in the definition of the term “service” appearing in the Bill but after extensive debates, the same was deleted. Mere repeal of the 1986 Act by the 2019 Act would not result in exclusion of ‘health care’ services rendered by doctors to patients from the definition of the term ‘service’” Held by Supreme Court
NOW we hope this issue in case raised again can be very well taken care by reasoned interpretation by the apex court. However, it is high time now to make appropriate amendment in the act by specifically mentioning the professional services and services provided by the statutory bodies.
Planning for the financial security and future needs of children is a vital component of parental responsibility. In India, there exists a plethora of investment avenues catering specifically to this purpose, each offering distinct features and potential benefits. This comprehensive guide aims to explore the top 25 investment options available for children in India, providing a detailed examination of their characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, and suitability to empower parents in making informed decisions.
Subas Tiwari
13. Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs):
Investing wisely for the future of children is paramount for parents. The aforementioned top 25 investment options cater to diverse financial goals, risk appetites, and investment horizons. By comprehensively understanding the nuances of each investment avenue—ranging from traditional instruments like PPF and FDs to modern options like REITs and P2P lending—parents can effectively strategize and secure their child’s financial future. It is imperative to weigh the advantages, disadvantages, and suitability of each option against individual preferences and financial objectives to make informed investment decisions that align with the long-term aspirations for their children.
In conclusion, investing for your children’s future demands a long-term commitment and prudent decision-making. With careful planning, disciplined execution, and periodic reassessment, you can help secure a prosperous financial future for your children.
In a recent development, iconic health drink brands like Bournvita are set to lose their ‘health drink’ status. This announcement marks a significant shift in the narrative surrounding these products and raises pertinent questions about the transparency and accountability of health claims in the consumer market.
For years, products like Bournvita have been marketed as essential supplements for promoting health and well-being, especially among children. However, the reclassification of these beverages challenges the conventional understanding of what constitutes a ‘health drink.’ It prompts us to reevaluate the claims made by manufacturers and underscores the need for greater scrutiny and regulation in the consumer goods industry.
The decision to revoke the ‘health drink’ status comes amid growing concerns about the nutritional value and health implications of such products. While they may offer certain benefits, the emphasis on their health-promoting properties often overshadows critical aspects such as sugar content, artificial additives, and overall nutritional balance.
Consumers, particularly parents, rely on these health drink brands with the expectation that they will contribute positively to their family’s well-being. However, the reclassification serves as a wake-up call, urging consumers to exercise greater discernment and demand transparency from manufacturers regarding the ingredients and nutritional composition of these products.
Moreover, this development underscores the importance of robust regulatory frameworks to protect consumer interests. It highlights the need for stringent guidelines governing health claims in advertising and packaging, ensuring that consumers are not misled by exaggerated or unsubstantiated assertions.
As consumers, we have the right to make informed choices about the products we purchase and consume. This includes access to accurate and reliable information about their nutritional content and potential health implications. The reclassification of ‘health drinks’ like Bournvita serves as a reminder of the responsibility that manufacturers bear in providing transparent and truthful representations of their products. It is a call to action for both manufacturers and regulators to prioritize the well-being of consumers above commercial interests. By fostering a culture of transparency and accountability, we can ensure that consumers make informed choices that promote their health and vitality.
We extend our sincere appreciation to our esteemed readers for their unwavering support. Your engagement, feedback, and ideas play a pivotal role in our mission to deliver informative articles. Share your thoughts and suggestions at info@consumer-voice.org, as together, we nurture a knowledgeable and empowered community.
Wishing you an enriching and enjoyable reading experience ahead!
Pallabi Boruah
Editor
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.