MA Schedule Tenth : Amendment to Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Explanation using Example

Example 1: Mediation in a Dispute Over a Defective Product

Introduction: Sarah, a resident of Mumbai, purchased a new smartphone from a local electronics store. Within a week, she noticed that the phone had several defects, including a malfunctioning camera and battery issues. Sarah contacted the store for a replacement, but the store refused, citing their policy of no returns on electronic items.

Application: Sarah decided to file a complaint with the District Consumer Commission. During the proceedings, both Sarah and the store owner agreed to try mediation to resolve the dispute, as per Section 37 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, amended by the Mediation Act, 2023.

Outcome: The mediator facilitated discussions between Sarah and the store owner. They reached an agreement where the store agreed to replace the defective phone with a new one. The terms of this agreement were documented and signed by both parties, as required by Section 37A(1). The mediator then prepared a settlement report and forwarded it to the District Commission, fulfilling the requirements of Section 37A(2).

Conclusion: By opting for mediation, Sarah and the store owner avoided a lengthy legal process and reached a mutually satisfactory resolution. Compliance with the mediation agreement ensured that no further legal action was necessary.

Example 2: Failed Mediation in a Service Dispute

Introduction: Raj, a freelance graphic designer from Delhi, hired a local internet service provider (ISP) for a high-speed internet connection. However, the service was frequently interrupted, affecting his work. Despite multiple complaints, the ISP failed to resolve the issue, prompting Raj to file a complaint with the State Consumer Commission.

Application: During the proceedings, the State Commission suggested mediation under Section 37 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as amended by the Mediation Act, 2023. Both parties agreed to attempt mediation.

Outcome: Despite several mediation sessions, Raj and the ISP could not reach an agreement. The mediator, as per Section 37A(3), prepared a report stating that no settlement was possible and submitted it to the State Commission. Consequently, the case proceeded to a formal hearing before the Commission.

Conclusion: The failure to reach a settlement through mediation meant that the dispute had to be resolved through the Commission's adjudication process. This example highlights the importance of mediation as a potential time-saving and cost-effective dispute resolution method, even though it may not always result in a settlement.

Example 3: Mediation in a Multi-Issue Consumer Dispute

Introduction: A group of consumers in Bangalore filed a joint complaint against a real estate developer for delayed possession of their apartments and poor construction quality. The complaint was filed with the National Consumer Commission.

Application: The National Commission, recognizing the complexity of the issues, referred the case to mediation under Section 37 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as amended by the Mediation Act, 2023. The parties agreed to mediate the dispute.

Outcome: During mediation, the parties reached a partial agreement on the issue of delayed possession, with the developer agreeing to compensate the consumers for the delay. However, no agreement was reached on the construction quality issues. The mediator documented the partial agreement and submitted a report to the National Commission, as required by Section 37A(1) and (2).

Conclusion: The mediation process helped resolve one aspect of the dispute, reducing the number of issues that needed formal adjudication. This example illustrates how mediation can be effective in addressing specific issues within a broader dispute.