NEW DELHI: While justice should be a cooling balm, not a heated ordeal, a district consumer court was recently forced to put the brakes on justice due to conditions that can only be described as sweltering. In a stark illustration of the inadequate infrastructure at the district consumer commission in Delhi, the southwest Delhi consumer commission put off the proceedings in a case on May 21 until the onset of winter, citing the dire state of infrastructure under which the forum is forced to function as temperatures soar in the national capital.
“There is neither air conditioner nor cooler in the courtroom. The temperature is more than 40°C. There is too much heat in the court room which led to sweating as such it is difficult to hear arguments. Moreover, there is no water supply even to go to the washroom to ease ourselves. In these circumstances, arguments cannot be heard so case is adjourned for the arguments,” the commission headed by president Suresh Kumar Gupta and comprising Harshali Kaur and Ramesh Chand Yadav, said in its May 21 order.
The commission directed that a copy of its order be also sent to the secretary-cum-commissioner in the department of consumer affairs “for information”.
Consumer courts are constituted under the central consumer protection law by the Centre’s department of consumer affairs. State governments are, however, responsible for appointments in these bodies and their infrastructure.
The unfortunate scenario, which is not just a local embarrassment for India’s capital city but also reflects poorly on the justice delivery system in consumer fora across India, has come to light even as the Supreme Court is currently seized of proceedings initiated on its own motion on the same issue.
{{/usCountry}}The unfortunate scenario, which is not just a local embarrassment for India’s capital city but also reflects poorly on the justice delivery system in consumer fora across India, has come to light even as the Supreme Court is currently seized of proceedings initiated on its own motion on the same issue.
{{/usCountry}}Taking note that these fora, which are designed to provide swift and effective resolution of consumer disputes, are being bogged down by infrastructural inadequacies, the Supreme Court in January 2021 initiated suo motu proceedings on account of “inaction of the government” in appointing members of the consumer courts and providing adequate infrastructure.
While hearing this matter, the top court issued a series of orders directing the Centre and state governments to expeditiously fill up vacancies in consumer courts across the country, besides taking stock of the infrastructural challenges plaguing the justice delivery system.
During the hearing of this case, the apex court also flagged the lapse of not conducting a “legislative impact study” before the new consumer protection law was notified in July 2020. The court in February and August 2021 underlined that a legislative impact study was a must to ascertain the volume of cases consumer courts at different levels will receive not only in the short term but also in the reasonable time in the future and the available infrastructure in the wake of the changes ushered in by the 2019 law.
The 2019 consumer protection law broadened the meaning of “consumer” allowing them to file a complaint from their place of residence; brought e-commerce platforms within the fold of the law; provided for time-bound redressal; made celebrity-endorsers also liable; and enhanced the monetary jurisdiction of consumer courts at all levels.
Under the new law, a district forum can decide a consumer dispute up to ₹1 crore as against ₹20 lakh under the old law. Similarly, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the state commission was been enhanced from ₹1 crore to ₹10 crore, and a national commission can now decide disputes over and above ₹10 crore.