Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently, a division bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma allowed an appeal in a case relating to deficiency of services under Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

• The Supreme Court allowed the appeal this in the case of Najrul Seikh v. Dr. Sumit Banerjee & Anr.

What was the Background of Najrul Seikh v. Dr. Sumit Banerjee & Anr Case?

• The Appellant, who was a BPL (Below Poverty Line) card holder and the father of Master Irshad, a 13-year-old boy, alleged negligence on the part of the Respondents, resulting in the complete loss of vision in Irshad's right eye after a cataract surgery.
• Briefly, Irshad sustained an eye injury on 14.11.2006, following which he underwent a cataract surgery conducted by Respondent No. 1, a doctor at Megha Eye Centre.
• Subsequently, Irshad experienced complications, leading to permanent loss of vision in his right eye.
• The initial complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was successful at the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC).
  • The DCDRC found negligence on the part of the Respondents, ordering compensation of INR 9,00,000 to be paid to the Appellant.
• However, the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) overturned the DCDRC's decision.
• The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) also dismissed the revision petition brought by the Appellant.
• Hence, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Upon review, the court found significant merit in the contention that both the SCDRC and the NCDRC failed to consider the evidence of negligence presented by the Appellant.
• The DCDRC's findings highlighted lapses in pre-operative and post-operative care by Respondent No.1, supported by expert evidence.
• Despite the Medical Council's report, the court noted that it did not delve into the specific details of pre-operative and post-operative care. The courts failed to properly consider the expert opinion provided by Dr. Gupta, which went unchallenged and uncontroverted.
• Ultimately, the court affirmed the DCDRC's finding of deficiency in medical services provided by the Respondents, ordering them to comply with the DCDRC's order of compensation within one month.
• In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, and the orders of the NCDRC and the SCDRC were set aside, directing compliance with the DCDRC's order.
• The rights of consumer were considered paramount.

What is Section 12 of the Consumer Act, 1986?

• Eligible Parties for Filing Complaints:

Complaints regarding the sale or delivery of goods, or the provision of services, can be filed with a District Forum by:

• • Individual Consumers: Those who have purchased or received the goods or services.
  • Recognized Consumer Associations: These may file complaints irrespective of whether the affected consumer is a member of the association or not.
  • Multiple Consumers with Shared Interest: Where multiple consumers share the same interest, one or more consumers may file a complaint on behalf of all concerned parties with the permission of the District Forum.
  • Government Representation: The Central or State Government may file a complaint either individually or as representatives of consumer interests in general.
• Filing Procedure:
  • Every complaint submitted under the aforementioned provisions must be accompanied by a prescribed fee, payable as specified by the regulations.
• Initial Review by District Forum:
  • Upon receiving a complaint as described in subsection (1), the District Forum has the authority to either allow the complaint to proceed or reject it by order.
  • The District Forum cannot reject a complaint without affording the complainant an opportunity to be heard.
  • Generally, the admissibility of the complaint should be decided within twenty-one days from the date of its submission.
• Proceedings Post Approval:
  • If the District Forum allows a complaint to proceed, it may continue with the complaint in accordance with the provisions outlined in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
  • Once a complaint is admitted by the District Forum, it cannot be transferred to any other court, tribunal, or authority established under different laws.
• Explanation:
  • The term "recognized consumer association" refers to any voluntary consumer association duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, or any other prevailing legislation.

What are the Major Differences Between the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the Consumer Protection Act, 2019?

What are the Rights of Consumer under Consumer Protection Act, 2019?