ROLE OF CONSUMER REDRESSAL FORUMS IN SPEEDY DISPOSAL OF THE CASES

Should we think ,everything is fine at all ends after the amendment 2002 in the consumer protection act?.Certainly not.It is not the law which makes the things final,it is the practice and practical experience which finally tells us where we stand.There are yet many quaries unanswered . Interpretations to the new added clauses are beeing done by the redressal agencies best suitable to the consumers which sometimes are creating a lot of hue and cry for want of clear cut provisions and explainations in the act. Act has provided ninty days time for disposal of the case and in case of testing and special reports, five months time is prescribed but consumer foras are not able to run with prescribed time

If we go back to the case of New India Insurance Co.Ltd. V Sriniwasan decided in 2002 by the Supreme court ,it was held that consumer foras need not go into technicalities of CPC or Indian evidence act and foras may go by the summery procedure laid down in the act itself in section 13.Had the legislature ever intended or meant to follow CPC,then there was no need to prescribe summery proceedure or section thirteen in the act.That clearly means that a set proceedure has been laid down for functioning of the consumer forums  so that forums function without giving many dates,without entertaing applications after applications .Forums enjoy enough discretionary powers to weigh the strength of the applications so raised which are meant to delay the proceedings and reject them summerarily.

 During the last two three years ,Ministry of consumer affairs has done a lot to make the consumers aware of their rights but at the same time  there was a misconception in the minds of consumers that once they have filed the case,they will get relief on the first appearance itself and when it does not happen so ,consumer  forums are blamed .Fact of the day is that consumer forums are over burdened with cases not only due to consumer awareness but also due to some practices by the litigating parties during the proceedings which drag the cases and disposal is delayed just because of small carelessness by both the parties Consumer forums are at times helpless before the situations because forums are not to follow CPC in strict sense   

It is true that due to bifurcations of the courts in Delhi at different places advocates are in difficulty to run from one place to other and often cases are dismissed in default on 2^nd call around 1.o’clock or in cases of OP’s absent they are proceeded ex-parte.Once the case is dismissed in default or proceeded exparte, application for setting aside the dismissal and ex-prte proceedings  is coming the very next date.Such application is to be put up with the file and some date is given for putting up the same wasting about one month in he process  .Since foras are not to follow CPC, case gets restored For restoring the case,notice is to go to other party taking another two months and only then case comes to its  original stage But it is very unfortunate that some  advocates are making it a practice to remain absent inspite of the fact dates are given to the advocates asking their convenience and most of the times all possible  adjustments are made with their dates.Clerks of the advocates are managing the whole affair and at times not aware of the case ,hence ask for date .

Appearance by proxy counsel without having any knowledge of the case is another problem.It is observed that he case is looked after by proxy counsel only and main counsel does not appear at all Some  advocates who are at learning stage and are  often present in the forum  state while appearing as proxy that they have got a phone call from such and such advocate  requesting  to appear on their behalf  and interestingly such  proxy is not aware of the correct stage of the case even in such cases.The result is obvious ,proxy is not having file with him and  asks for adjournment . On the next date also main counsel sends  some or the other application through proxy counsel  ,other party is to reply the application now The case is delayed by another two to three months. 

Looking into the above situations, it becomes the responsibility of the consumer foras to deal with such situations with heavy hand and impose heavy cost on the defaulters and adjournment seekers.  Consumer foras must refuse to entertain proxy and clerks of the advocates  in routine and they should not be allowed continuously for two dates.Applications so filed with intention to delay the mater ,must be rejected and disposed off there and then  if there is no substance in it.

Execution petition filed under section 27 are to be disposed off as the OP makes appearance after receiving the notice but OP’s are often replying the execution petition and finding loop holes in the order .They even try to get such orders set aside though there is no provision in the act for setting aside the final order of the fora.Consumer forums are in fact not to entertain any replies after final order They must follow strictly as per section 27 and section 25 to get the order complied .This is also noted that advocates for OP’s state before the forum that they are going in appeal and ask for adjournment in execution matters. Neither they file appeal nor they produce  stay order and in between the situation they try to bargain with the consumers to drop some of the claimed  amount.Section 24 of the act is very clear on the subject that every order is final if no appeal has been preferred against such order.Consumer foras must not entertain such pleas unless proof of filing such appeal is submitted before the forums.

There are yet another situations when expert opinion is required for reaching to the conclusion and final findings by the forums.In cases of medical negligence ,most of the times, complete papers are not filed by the consumers either they could not obtain from the treating hospital/doctor or they have misplaced .In such situations ,at the end of the case ,no expert opinion could be made available for want of relevant papers .Supreme court has rightly held in recent case that prior to admitting the negligence case ,expert opinion must be obtain .This does not mean at all to deprive the consumer as consumers are apprehending that they will not get expert opinion and hence their case shall not be admitted.The fact remains that if papers are not found complete at the end ,there is absolutely no chance of winning the case but if efforts are made to complete the papaers in the beginning itself for sending them for expert opinion,half the job is done .Similar treatment should be given to the cases of defective vehicles where expert and technical reports are required and such cases should be admitted after obtaining the expert report. Many false cases will go unadmitted saving much more time of the forums.

It is not out of place to mention here that while adopting the provisions of section thirteen of the act , foras are doing good job and  disposing of number of cases on the first date itself when opposite party agrees to redress the grievance .Of course there is a persution by the courts to reach to mutual consent and the order is made on the bases of their settlement and is stated ‘disposed of as settled within the parties’  or ‘withdrawn as settled’ This often happens when both the parties are keen to get the grievance redressed .There is a need of the day to stop all delaying practices and advocates must give equal importance to consumer cases if take the assignments it hand.Otherwise time is not far off when consumer courts will turn into civil courts.

 

 Dr PREM LATA 

Previous

Next