The invention of various electronic gadgets as such television, air conditioner, refrigerator, washing machine, tube light etc has made our life super easy and hence, electronic goods have become an inseparable part of our daily life. Electronic goods have made its way into every aspects of our life from office to hospitals to banking sectors and even shopping malls. Utilization of electronic goods not only causes efficiency of work but also helps to keep things compact. Even if we take a look around our house, we will easily understand the dependency of ourselves upon electronic gadgets in order to run our day to day affairs smoothly. However, like every other great invention on Earth, the world of electronic devices also tends to bear a few flaws which adversely affect the consumers of the same. In the recent few years, a ton of Consumer Complaints have been registered against a number of leading Electronic goods manufacturing companies in India.
RERA v. Consumer Courts
Case filed against 11 travel agents for money refund to customers | Hindustan Times
It is important to note that the goods purchased or services availed for commercial purposes cannot be challenged under the Consumer Protection Act of India. The Consumer Protection Act, aims to provide better protection of interest of consumers and enacts for the establishment of consumer councils and authorities for settlement of consumer disputes and matters that are connected therewith. The Act extends to whole of India except the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The Act applies to all goods and services and the central government may by notification expressly exclude applicability of the Act to goods or services by providing for the same in the notification. The Act defines consumer in section 2 d as a person who buys goods or hires services for consideration or a price paid or promised to be paid but does not include a person who buys goods or hires services from the applicability of defines consumer as a person who has bought goods or hires services for commercial purposes.
Consumer courts and Co-operative Housing Societies
As more and more consumer markets brands turn to influencers and social media stars to promote their products, novel legal issues are bound to arise! The decision was not based on whether glyphosate had been improperly listed under Prop 65, or whether the amount of exposure to average users was below the no significant risk level. This decision is important, as it is the first final … Continue Reading.
On March 18, , Kanta Bhakta purchased a pair of bangles and a single bangle from a jeweller in Dadar. They were declared to be of 22 carat gold purity and accordingly she was charged for gold of 22 carat purity plus an additional amount as making charges. After the purchase, the bangles were kept in her locker.