No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Consumers are finding themselves in a wide online landscape in an era of digital convenience. Although there are many advantages of the internet, it is important to stay vigilant against such practices commonly referred to as dark patterns. These subtle design choices alter consumer behaviour, often leading to unintended effects.
Rinki Sharma
The Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution has released directives addressing the prevention and oversight of dark patterns. These guidelines target deceptive design practices that manipulate users, compromising their autonomy and decision-making. Applicable to all platforms offering goods or services in India, along with advertisers and sellers, the regulations fall under the jurisdiction of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), established by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The guidelines explicitly forbid any individual or platform from employing dark patterns. They enumerate prohibited practices, such as false urgency, basket sneaking, and forced actions. Non-compliance with these guidelines may result in penalties. These measures are designed to safeguard consumer rights and ensure fair and transparent interactions in the marketplace.
Understanding Dark Patterns: These are user interface design tricks that can be used to direct users in taking actions that they possibly would not have taken willingly.
Do’s:
Don’ts:
By staying informed and making wise choices, individuals can empower themselves against online manipulation. Practicing caution and following best practices can equip consumers with the confidence and security needed to navigate the digital landscape. Your Online Safety Matters!
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
Answer: Yes Can file complaint together by number of consumers as ‘class action’ or ‘joint complaint’
Sec 2(v) ‘complainant’ one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest
(c) one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Commission, on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested;
Sec 18 (1) (a)
Central Consumer Protection Authority (“Central Authority“) under Section 18 (1) (a) to “protect, promote and enforce the rights of consumers as a class”
Facts. Noting by court on 26.12.2023 as hereunder:
(बिहार पटना)
उभय पक्ष उपस्थित .अभिलेख के आकलन से ज्ञात होता है की विपक्षी द्वारा हर बार समय मांग किया जा रहा है जबकि वादी प्रत्येक तिथि पैर उपस्थित रहते है और उनके द्वारा लिखित बेहेस भी दाखिल किया जा चूका है.ऐसी स्थिति में विपक्षी जब तक ६००/-रूपया कास्ट की राशी जमा नहीं करत तब तक उसकी बहस स्वीकार नहीं की जाएगी अगली तिथि 2.2.2024
नोटिंग 2.2.2024
अगली तिथि 13.5.2024.
Answer:
Write to Ministry of consumer affairs Govt of India, State Consumer commission and Nation consumer commission with the notings made for adjournments
Court should have heard complainant’s arguments proceeding OP ex party and reserve the order, cost could be added with the order.
Answer: There is no provision of second appeal under the Act
Section 21(b) in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
(b) to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any State Commission where it appears to the National Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
It is pertinent to mention that the same provision exists now in the new Act Consumer protection act 2019 too
58 (1) (b) in Consumer Protection Act 2019
“To call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any State Commission where it appears to the National Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity”.
Case Law: Sunil Kumar Maity V/s State Bank of India and Anr. .civil appeal 432 of 2022 decided on 21th Jan 2022
“It is needless to say that the revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission under Section 21(b) of the said Act is extremely limited. It should be exercised only in case as contemplated within the parameters specified in the said provision, namely when it appears to the National Commission that the State Commission had exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or had failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested, or had acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.’
Answer: When the entire building, including the unsold 35 flats, is transferred to the society, these unsold flats now belong to the society as the owner. While the builder may not retain ownership of these flats, it’s plausible that adjustments in accounts have been made, considering the construction and unsold flat costs.
Under these circumstances, occupants are not obligated to pay monthly maintenance charges for the unsold flats. The expenses for common areas, electricity, plumbing, and other communal services are to be covered from the collective funds belonging to the society.
Answer: The complainant has the authority to designate someone to appear on their behalf. Failure of the complainant to appear may lead to the dismissal of the complaint by default.
Answer:
Two issues involved –a) Notice not served.
Answer: If there is no existing order against the manufacturer, the recourse under the product liability clause, specifically Section 85 and 86, allows you to pursue action against the dealer exclusively.
Answer: The property is no longer legally yours as it has been declared government land. You have the option to file a case in a civil court, treating it as a recovery suit, seeking a refund of your money along with compensation for unfair dealing. Alternatively, you can file a complaint before the consumer court or RERA, citing unfair trade practices, and seek a refund along with compensation.
Answer: NCLT is not an appellate court for consumer matters. Therefore, filing an appeal there may not be effective. However, if the case is dismissed due to the opposing party being declared insolvent, you can then act as a financial creditor and submit a claim before NCLT seeking a refund or any other resolution as per the decisions made by NLCT.
Answer: Submit a complaint to the consumer commission and request an interim order for possession at the initially agreed cost until a decision is reached on the merits of the case. File a claim for compensation for the delay in court. Challenge the issue of increased costs by emphasizing that the delay was caused by the builder, and the homebuyer had initially agreed to the cost set during the three-year construction period.
Answer: You can lodge a complaint with the consumer commission, and depending on the merits of the case, you have various options such as repair, replacement, refund, etc.
Answer:
Answer: Submit an application to the electricity department requesting a meter inspection and be prepared to pay a fee for this service. If the meter is discovered to be fast or defective, the billing will be adjusted based on the previous billing pattern, calculating the average over the last six months.
Answer: A replacement is not warranted unless it is declared irreparable or found to have a manufacturing defect. In such instances, one may consider approaching the consumer court, seek an expert opinion, and pursue a decision based on the merits of the case.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is the 21st-century global public health problem. AMR occurs when microbes, such as bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites stop responding to antimicrobial medicines. Because of the high rate of antibiotic overuse that leads to alterations in the bacterium itself, bacterial AMR poses the greatest concern. AMR is predicted to cause 10 million deaths annually by 2050, according to The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, a UK government program [1]. WHO and other organizations acknowledge that a promptly coordinated worldwide strategy is necessary to fight AMR, even though they do not agree with this estimate. For this reason, statistics about the present global burden of bacterial AMR and its regional patterns are needed. Future generations will see the emergence of increasingly deadly infections that are incurable if effective management is not implemented. This article sheds light on global trends and developments pertaining to antimicrobial resistance in bacteria.
Dr Vikrant Kumar
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi
A research that was published in The Lancet estimates that 4.9 million deaths worldwide in 2019 were related to bacterial AMR [2]. It further states that the worldwide burden of bacterial AMR was caused by three infectious syndromes: bloodstream infections, intra-abdominal infections, and lower respiratory and thoracic infections. Six pathogens (E coli, Staphylococcus aureus, K pneumoniae, S pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa) were responsible for majority of the deaths linked to AMR.
Image caption: Mortality rate due to bacterial resistance to antibiotics in 2019. Source: Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis [2]
India has one of the highest incidences of AMR worldwide and is an emerging hub for bacterial AMR. AMR’s burden in India is mostly caused by over-the-counter availability of drugs, unrestricted and excessive human use, antibiotic use in poultry and agriculture, public ignorance, and shortcomings in national surveillance and monitoring of AMR. Antimicrobial resistance in India is further exacerbated by inadequate use of diagnostics, overcrowding that increases the risk of cross-infections, over prescription by physicians, and inadequate health infrastructure. The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) annual report on the antimicrobial resistance research and surveillance network (2022) stated that E. coli, which causes meningitis, pneumonia, bacteremia, abdominal and pelvic infections, urinary tract infections, and infections, has become less susceptible to major antibiotics [3]. According to the data, E. Coli resistance to piperacillin-tazobactam climbed from 35% to 56% between 2017 and 2022, while resistance to ceftazidime increased from 18% to 23% and resistance to ciprofloxacin from 12% to 19%. S. aureus has also shown a noticeable upward trend in antibiotic resistance over time against clindamycin and cefoxitin. Similar trends were reported for Klebsiella pneumoniae, a causative agent of pneumonia, bloodstream infections, and meningitis. K. pneumoniae’s sensitivity to imipenem decreased gradually during the previous six years, falling from 59% in 2017 to 42% in 2022. There has been a modest and inconsistent drop in meropenem susceptibility for K. pneumoniae. Nearly, 88% of the Acinetobacter baumannii isolates were resistant to carbapenems and left with limited treatment options. Against A. baumannii, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, ceftazidime, amikacin and levofloxacin showed limited activity. When it comes to hospital-acquired infections, Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections are becoming a major concern, especially in patients who are very sick or have compromised immune systems. P. aeruginosa cause post-surgery infections in the blood, lungs (pneumonia), and/ or other body parts. These bacteria persistently find a new way to evade the effects of the antibiotics and become resistant to the treatment. The growth of drug-resistant bacteria is the main reason for the higher mortality rates. During 2017 to 2022, an increasing resistance was observed in P. aeruginosa against the majority of antibiotics- ceftazidime (41.2% to 43.6%), cefepime (46.1% to 48.1%), imipenem (40.5% to 51.1% ), meropenem (47.9% to 54.1% &), amikacin (51.4% & 60.4%), gentamicin (44.4% to 48.2%), tobramycin (50.1% to 65.8%), ciprofloxacin (35.9% to 38.5%) and levofloxacin (33.3% to 42.6%).
Image Caption: Trends of antibiotic resistance among major bacterial strains from 2017-2022. Source: Annual report on antimicrobial resistance research and surveillance network (2022), ICMR [3]
The use of antibiotics is a cornerstone of modern medicine. The emergence and spread of bacteria resistant to drugs threatens our ability to treat common illnesses and perform life-saving procedures. Antibiotic resistance is a major global health issue that decreases the efficacy of traditional treatments against common bacterial infections. The abuse and overuse of antibiotics in humans, animals, and plants are the main factors contributing to the formation of drug-resistant diseases. AMR affects all important sects a country leading to social and economic burden. Its primary causes are poverty and inequality, with low- and middle-income countries being most affected. The present AMR crisis highlights the urgent need for improved antimicrobial practices and broader surveillance coverage on a worldwide scale. In addition, awareness programs by local governments can help in reducing the cases of antibiotic abuse.
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.
International travel insurance serves as a financial product crafted to shield travellers from unforeseen events and expenses while journeying outside their home country. Its primary objective is to furnish coverage for medical emergencies, trip cancellations, lost baggage, and other unexpected occurrences that may disrupt or negatively impact a trip.
Subas Tiwari
Travellers often underestimate the potential risks associated with international travel. Having travel insurance is essential for several reasons:
Coverage under international travel insurance can fluctuate, but it often includes:
In conclusion, international travel insurance is a vital part of trip planning, providing protection and peace of mind. By understanding coverage types, assessing needs, and choosing a reputable provider, travellers can ensure a worry-free and enjoyable experience. Thoroughly read and comprehend policy terms, follow proper procedures in emergencies, and purchase insurance well in advance for maximum benefits. Safe travels!
Company Name |
Product Name |
Medical Expenses |
Loss of Passport |
Baggage Loss |
Premium (GST included) |
Tata AIG |
Travel Guard – Gold |
$50,000 |
$250 |
$500 |
₹ 4,196 |
Niva Bupa |
Travel Assure |
$50,000 |
$300 |
$500 |
₹ 2,467 |
Reliance |
Travel Care Individual |
$50,000 |
$300 |
$500 |
₹ 2,812 |
Care Health |
Explore Silver |
$50,000 |
Not Cover |
Not Cover |
₹ 3,009 |
Bajaj Allianz |
Travel Elite |
$50,000 |
$250 |
$500 |
₹ 3,722 |
DIGIT General Insurance |
Carefree Option |
$50,000 |
$300 |
$750 |
₹ 2,456 |
Royal Sundaram |
Travel Shield Single Trip |
$50,000 |
$250 |
$500 |
₹ 3,288 |
SBI General Insurance |
Worldwide |
$50,000 |
$2000 |
$2000 |
₹ 5,890 |
New India Assurance |
Overseas Travel Ease |
$50,000 |
$200 |
$400 |
₹ 4,149 |
Oriental Insurance |
Business and Holiday – Silver B |
$50,000 |
$300 |
$1000 |
₹ 4,740 |
Quotes taken from: policybazaar.com as on 13th December 2023
By following these guidelines, travellers can make informed decisions and minimize the risk of claim rejection when purchasing international travel insurance in India.
Related
Health insurance proves invaluable during challenging situations such as medical emergencies. It not only provides financial relief by covering the...
During these times when people have to adhere to strict timelines, work longer hours, attend tours and meetings, the working class is always on the...
If you find yourself dissatisfied with the services provided by your current mobile phone service provider and wish to switch to a different...
It is a case where the car was painted to match the original colour before being handed to the complainant. It was not stated in the report that the car was old or involved in an accident prior to repainting. Instead, it is a case of typical scratches that were bound to appear during the vehicle’s trailer transportation from the factory to the agency, according to state commission Haryana Panchkula. SC affirms that there was no manufacturing flaw in this instance.
Dr Prem Lata Legal Head VOICE
Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramanium, Zaffar Shah, Rajeev Dhavan, Dushyant Dave, Chander Uday Singh, Dinesh Dwivedi, Shekhar Naphade, Nitya Ramakrishnan, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Menaka Guruswamy, Prashanto Chandra Sen, Sanjay Parikh and Advocate Warisha Farasat argued.
Attorney General for India R Venkataramani, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, ASG Vikramjeet Banerjee and Advocate Kanu Agarwal.
Senior Advocates Harish Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, V Giri, Guru Krishnakumar; Advocates Archana Pathak Dave, VK Biju and Charu Mathur.
With Writ Petition (C) No. 871 of 2015 With Writ Petition (C) No. 722 of 2014 With SLP (C) No. 19618 of 2017 ,With Writ Petition (C) No. 1013 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1082 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1068 of 20 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1037 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1062 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1070 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1104 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1165 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1210 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1222 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 396 of 2017 With Writ Petition (C) No. 756 of 2017 With Writ Petition (C) No. 398 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No. 924 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1092 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1162 of 2018 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1048 of 2019 With Writ Petition (C) No. 1268 of 2019 And With Writ Petition (C) No. 1368 of 2019.
The Supreme Court on December 11th,2023 upheld the validity of the Union Government’s 2019 decision to repeal the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) under Article 370 of the Constitution.
Part –A
The Recommendation of J&K Constituent Assembly was not necessary for the President to declare Article 370 inoperative.
Background of the case:
Some changes were made by Adding a clause to article 367 through notification issued by the President (Constitution Order 272) specifying “that the references to the “Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir” should be read as the “Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir” and the “Government of J&K” can be construed as the “Governor of J&K”.
It is appropriate to mention that these changes enabled the President to issue the next Constitution Order, CO 273, to declare Article 370 inoperative without obtaining the recommendation of the J&K Constituent Assembly (which was dissolved in 1957) as stipulated in the proviso to Article 370(3).)
The Supreme Court nullified a segment of the notification issued by the President (Constitution Order 272). This decision was based on the assertion that the alterations to Article 367 constituted an amendment with a significant impact on Article 370. The court disapproved of this action, citing the failure to adhere to the appropriate procedure for such amendments.
Refusing to endorse this backdoor method of amendment, the CJI DY Chandrachud wrote in the judgment:
“While the ‘interpretation’ clause can be used to define or give meaning to particular terms, it cannot be deployed to amend a provision by bypassing the specific procedure laid down for its amendment. This would defeat the purpose of having a procedure for making an amendment”
Supreme court reiterated that the amendments to Constitutional provisions have to be carried out by following the procedure prescribed under Article 368. That is through passing an amendment bill in the Parliament with the backing of the prescribed majority.
Despite invalidating the changes made to Article 367 through Constitution Order 272, the Court upheld the repeal of J&K’s special status. Supreme Court held that the President did not require the recommendation of the J&K Constituent Assembly to issue a declaration that Article 370 was inoperative. Thus, Constitution Order 273 was upheld.
Although the Court held as invalid the Constitutional Order 272 to the extent it changed the meaning of ‘J&K Constituent Assembly’ as ‘J&K Legislative Assembly’ and ‘J&K Government’ as ‘Governor’, this conclusion did not affect the outcome of the judgment since the Court held that the recommendation of J&K Constituent Assembly was not necessary for the President to declare Article 370 as inoperative.
Part-B
Parliament can carve out a Union Territory from a state.
Background of the case:
Basic question raised in the writs:
The powers under Article 356 (the perception of Article 356) should only be employed to restore normalcy in the State facing a breakdown of the Constitutional machinery and should not be wielded to institute fundamental and enduring changes (referred to by the petitioners as ‘irreversible changes’ as an emergency provision)
In a certain sense, the Presidential proclamation under Article 356 facilitated these decisions by empowering the Union Government to act on behalf of the State, without political consensus at the State level.
“Actions which are taken during the subsistence of a Proclamation must bear a proximate relationship with the need to discharge the exigencies of governance
The ultimate object and purpose of the constitutional arrangement envisaged in the article is to restore the functioning of the constitutional machinery in the state.
Legislative and executive action has to bear a proximate relationship to the object and purpose underlying the suspension of the constitutional machinery in the state”
The court rejected the argument of petitioners that Union cannot take actions of irreversible consequences in the State during Presidential rule. The Court further held that the views of the concerned State regarding the proposed reorganization, expressed as per proviso to Article 3, are not binding on the Parliament.
“..The views of the Legislature of the State are not binding on Parliament in terms of the first proviso to Article 3. The views of the Legislature of the State under the first proviso to Article 3 are recommendatory to begin with,” the Court held. The precedent laid down by a 5-judge bench in Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1959) was followed in this regard.
Therefore, the Court held that the Parliament passing the reorganization Act when the State Assembly was dissolved and the State was placed under Presidential rule was not a mala fide exercise, since the views of the State legislature are not binding in any case.
“..The views of the Legislature of the State are not binding on Parliament in terms of the first proviso to Article 3. The views of the Legislature of the State under the first proviso to Article 3 are recommendatory to begin with”
Reference was made to the judgment in Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1959) that the views of the State legislature regarding the reorganisation of that State were not binding on the Parliament.
Justice Sanjiv Khanna, in his separate but concurring judgment, sounded a word of caution, by saying:
“Conversion of a State into Union Territory has grave consequences, amongst others; it denies the citizens of the State an elected state government and impinges on federalism. Conversion/creation of a Union Territory from a State has to be justified by giving very strong and cogent grounds. It must be in strict compliance with Article 3 of the Constitution of India”.
The court held that it need not adjudicate on the validity of the presidential proclamations announcing President’s Rule in the State since petitioners did not challenge the same. In any case, the court found that no material relief could be given as the President’s Rule was withdrawn in October 2019.
The court held that there are limitations on power of the Union and States when proclamation of presidential rule was in force. It stated that the scope of the power of the Union depends on the circumstances. The court added that the exercise of power under Article 356 must have a reasonable nexus with the object of the proclamation. Further, the court stated that there were innumerable decisions taken by the Union on behalf of States. Thus, it added, “Every decision taken by Union on behalf of State during Presidential rule is not open to challenge…this will lead to the administration of state to a standstill…“
Part-C
Article 370 was a temporary provision
The Supreme Court on December 11 upheld the validity of the Union Government’s 2019 decision to repeal the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) under Article 370 of the Constitution. The Court held
“We direct that steps shall be taken by the Election Commission of India to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir constituted under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act by 30 September 2024. Restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible,” stated the judgment of CJI DY Chandrachud.
Part-D
Justice Kaul Recommends “Truth & Reconciliation Commission” to report Human Rights Violations in Jammu & Kashmir
Key points of Justice Sanjay Krishan Koul Recommendations
“Army is meant to fight battles with enemies of the State and not really to control the law-and-order situation within the State. But then, these were peculiar times. The entry of the Army created its own ground realities and, in their endeavour, to preserve the integrity of the State and the nation against foreign incursions, the men, women and the children of the State paid a heavy price,” Justice Kaul said.