| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Supreme Court on Consumer Protection Act, 2019 |
| Introduction | SC emphasized the Act’s aim to promote consumerism, cautioning against technical interpretation to the detriment of consumers. |
| Factual Background | Association filed complaint against builder for failure in constructing flats within agreed timeline. Builder filed complaint alleging association’s bye-laws non-compliance with HRRS Act. |
| Legal Issues | Interpretation of Consumer Protection Act, 2019; Compliance with HRRS Act; NCDRC’s jurisdiction. |
| Applicable Law | Consumer Protection Act, 2019; Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012. |
| Analysis | SC criticized hyper-technical approach, emphasizing Act’s pro-consumer stance. It set aside NCDRC’s order, directing expedited merit-based hearings. |
| Conclusion | SC stressed Act’s objective of encouraging consumerism, urging courts to avoid overly technical interpretations against consumers. |
| Current Scenario | Pending cases to be expedited, emphasizing merit-based hearings. |
CASE SUMMARY: The Supreme Court emphasized the Consumer Protection Act, 2019’s aim to promote consumerism, cautioning against overly technical interpretations that could harm consumers. The case involved an association filing a complaint against a builder for failing to construct flats within the agreed timeline, while the builder alleged non-compliance of the association’s bye-laws with the Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012. The SC set aside the NCDRC’s order, directing expedited merit-based hearings, highlighting the Act’s pro-consumer stance.
SOURCE- THE ECONOMIC TIMES
READ MORE- DELHI LIQUOR POLICY CASE
