Today, On 16th September, Multiplexes Owners and film producers have approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the Rs.200 limit on movie ticket prices. They claim the price restriction is “manifestly arbitrary,” affecting single screens and multiplexes regardless of location, technology, or format.
The Central Consumer Protection Authority fined VLCC Rs 3 lakh for misleading ads on Lipolaser and CoolSculpting treatments. The watchdog said the company made false claims without scientific proof, violating consumer rights
A lawyer has filed a consumer court case against Gucci, alleging that defective shoes caused him to slip and suffer injuries. He claims the luxury brand caused physical harm, mental trauma, and failed in customer service.
The Consumer Forum rejected a plea against a food outlet, questioning the complainants’ choice. It asked, “If strictly vegetarian, why order from a restaurant serving both veg and non-veg instead of a purely vegetarian one?”
The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur, has ruled in favor of a complainant against Nokia Mobile Company Ltd. and its dealer over a defective phone and inadequate redressal.
The Competition Commission of India fined Meta Rs. 213.14 crore for abusing its market dominance related to WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy, which forced users to accept new data-sharing terms. The CCI issued cease-and-desist orders, requiring changes to data handling practices, including opt-out options and transparency in data sharing.
The Supreme Court on Thursday,(14th Nov) rejected a plea to mandate doctors to inform patients about medication risks, deeming it impractical due to overcrowded pharmacies and doctors’ limited patient consultations. Suggestions for printed forms were dismissed as unfeasible. The court stressed existing responsibilities of manufacturers and pharmacists to provide such information, concluding no legislative gap existed.
Two individuals, Sourish Bose and Deepanvita Ghosh, are accused of defrauding Amazon of over Rs. 69 lakh by purchasing items, initiating returns, and returning fake products instead of originals. The Karnataka High Court described their actions as “ingenious” and has reserved its decision on their petition to quash the FIR against them.
A Bengaluru consumer court ordered Dilmil Matrimony to pay Rs. 60,000 to Vijaya Kumar for failing to provide a suitable match for his son despite receiving Rs. 30,000. The court found the site did not fulfill its obligations or demonstrate effort in service, constituting unfair trade practices and a breach of consumer trust.
A US court’s 277-page ruling exposes Google’s manipulation of search results, favoring its own services and stifling competition. Judge Mehta’s decision is a win for antitrust authorities, revealing Google’s anti-competitive practices. The ruling may impact Google’s advertising business and sets a precedent for the tech industry’s competitive landscape.
