Friday, 22 February 2013

Terms in contract cannot oust consumer court jurisdiction

When one buys goods (or even apartments), the terms of sale frequently impose the condition that any dispute between the seller and the buyer will be adjudicated only in the courts of Delhi or Mumbai or some other city where the selling company might have its head office.
If there is a defect with the goods and the seller does not rectify it, the Consumer Protection Act provides for easy and in expensive relief. According to Sec. 11 of the Act, a case can be filed before a District Consumer Forum within whose territorial jurisdiction, the seller resides or carries on business or has a branch office or where the cause of action arises.ÿIt is naturally very convenient for the consumer to file a case in a consumer forum rather than a court in Delhi or Mumbai. But many consumer fora have dismissed such complaints as not maintainable since the consumers are bound by the terms of the contract which compels the case to be heard in Delhi or Mumbai.
But in a recent decision (I(2013) CPJ 31 (NC)), the National Consumer Commission has come to the rescue of the consumers. It says that the jurisdiction of the consumer fora are not ousted by terms in the contract. It agreed that by mentioning any specific condition in the agreement, one party cannot take the benefit of territorial jurisdiction of the courts of their choice.
Therefore, if consumers see such restrictive conditions in the terms of sale, they can disregard them and file cases in the consumer fora which have territorial jurisdiction.
B.V.Shenoy, Mysore Grahakara Parishat