“Defect” and “Unfair trade practice”
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (CPA) is the principal law protecting the interests of consumers in India.
CPA statutorily defines “defect” as “any fault, imperfection or shortcoming in the quality, quantity, potency, purity or standard which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or under any contract, express or implied or as is claimed by the trader in any manner whatsoever in relation to any goods or product”.
“Unfair trade practice” is also defined by CPA to include false representation that the goods in question are of a particular standard, quality, quantity, grade, composition, style or model.
The CPA enables the consumer to file a complaint against a trader (includes manufacturer) on various grounds, such as “defect” in goods purchased and unfair trade practice(s), and claim relief for loss or damages suffered as a consequence.
(Ineffective) safety feature
A motor vehicle’s safety features (eg. airbags) has become one of the key selling points for a car buyer and the same is actively promoted by vehicle manufacturers and dealers through advertisements and express representations. Apart from malfunction, even where safety features are ineffective or not activated due to system calibration or the safety technology not deeming it appropriate to do so, the car buying consumer may still be legally protected under CPA and entitled to compensation for injury, loss or damages suffered as a result.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has confirmed the applicability of above said legal protection under CPA in the case of a consumer whose vehicle airbags failed to deploy despite significant vehicle damage following an accident, which included frontal damage to the vehicle. Finding that the purchase decision of the complainant was largely made on the basis of representation of the safety features of the vehicle in question, the Hon’ble Court reasoned that the impact of the collision was such that it would have been reasonable to assume that there would have been deployment of vehicle’s airbags and the safety description of the vehicle fell short of its expected quality. Further, the content of the owners’ manual did not carry any material from which the owner of a vehicle could be alerted that in such a collision the airbags would not deploy.
Punitive damages and vehicle replacement
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions (“the Consumer Commissions”) have been empowered under the CPA to grant reliefs of various natures, including replacement of the defective goods with new goods of similar description and free from any defect and award of damages beyond the actual loss suffered in monetary terms. Damages may include punitive damages against the manufacturer, awarded as a deterrent where the defect is found to have the potential to cause serious injury or major loss to the consumer, such as failed safety features of a vehicle, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above case.
Furthermore, the Hon’ble Court also found no fault in the Consumer Commission’s directions to replace the defective vehicle despite not being claimed as a relief by the consumer/complainant as it is within the jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission to mould the reliefs claimed to do effective justice.
Legal information by Legalrisk – law, risk and AI
Got questions? Feel free to comment below.
