Without infrastructure, passing the new consumer protection act is pointless: Jehangir Gai

What ails the remedy course for consumers?

All along, there was clamour that the jurisdiction of the District Forum should be lower so that small matters can be decided expeditiously. Understand that for certain cases you can afford to wait and for others you cannot afford to wait.

Suppose you buy a refrigerator worth Rs 15,000-20,000, which would be equivalent to the lawyer’s fees itself to fight the case.  You may decide to fight on your own; if the case goes on for 3-5 years, where do you keep the old fridge in a small apartment and, unless you get rid of the old fridge, how do you buy a new one? Even if you are right, you have to compulsorily forgo your right.

Would the District Forum be able to handle the surge in cases?

How much will the District Forum handle? It will be physically and humanly impossible for the District Forum to decide matters. There is just one stenographer between the President and the two members. How do they share the stenographer? When I want to give dictation, she is with you. When does she take dictation from me?

During the court, the same stenographer is taking the Roznama, the daily order sheet. She is sitting on the dais; after the court hours, she is with the presiding officer. If there is a wedding or illness in the family or she goes on leave, the forum stops functioning, as there is nobody to take the dictation.

Would the increase in District Forum’s jurisdiction cause further delays?

A company that has a fire claim worth Rs 1 crore and a retail consumer, who has purchased a television set or a mixer grinder that isn’t functioning, would all be heard together in the same queue.

There would be enormous delays and if you appear in person, you have to file three sets, take leave, then come to work, travel for the hearing and the case is going to take so long that it is going to be terrible.

Has the delay for justice led to any change in the number of consumer cases filed?

In the Mumbai suburban Consumer Forum, nearly 1500 cases were being filed in 1999; now, around 500 cases are being filed, which is about one-third the cases filed earlier. People are frustrated with the way the forum delays the matter.

It is not worth your while fighting for your rights. Take for instance Mediclaim, which comprises 85 per cent of the matters at the District level. The claimant may have applied for anything from Rs 50,000 to Rs 3-4 lakh. Now, an old person will be dead and gone before the case gets decided.

What is the other significant change in the new Act?

Prior to the new act, it was the value of the goods and services plus the compensation claimed that would determine the jurisdiction. Now, it is not even the value of the good and services; it is just what you have paid. So, if you have booked a flat worth Rs 2 crore and paid Rs 50 lakh. The consideration paid till the date of filing the case is Rs 50 lakh and hence it will still go to the district forum. I may be claiming a Rs 5 crore compensation, but that would be disregarded.

Are there no provisions to increase the capacity of the existing Forums under the new Act?

Without the infrastructure and adequate space, what is the point in passing the new act? If additional forums are set up, then I would say ‘fantastic,’ because it would help consumers get justice at their doorstep. But we are not interested in the theory part, but in the results it can deliver. If you come to the Forums, you will find that there is no place to walk, the files are just dumped and then you can’t locate the files.

Are any appeals filed to correct the anomaly in the jurisdiction under the new Consumer Act?

We don’t see any change. We had filed writ petitions also; sometimes, half-hearted attempts are made just for the record. Once a person retires, no new appointment is made for more than six months.

Sometime ago, the South Mumbai Forum was not functional for nearly two years. The President wanted to complete documentation for the matters he had heard. Then he wanted to use up his accumulated leave, so six months prior to his retirement he stopped hearing matters. Then he retired and there was no appointment for another six months and after that a member was to retire after six months, so again matters were not heard.