The Supreme Court has ruled that consumer forums can enforce all their orders like civil court decrees, ending an 18-year gap caused by a 2002 amendment. The judgment ensures consumers get real justice and not just “paper victories.”
Delhi High Court questioned restaurants for levying service charges despite already charging above MRP for food and drinks. The bench said ambience and service are included in the inflated prices, calling the extra charge unfair.
A PIL challenges the rollout of E20 petrol, warning it harms engines, cuts fuel efficiency, and leaves consumers without insurance cover. The plea seeks ethanol-free petrol, labelling, and consumer protection.
An insurer rejected a man’s mediclaim citing mismatched Google Timeline data. The consumer forum ruled in the patient’s favour, calling the reason false and ordering full payment with interest.
The Mumbai Consumer Court has ruled against SpiceJet for negligent behavior, ordering the airline to pay Rs 25,000 to a senior citizen. The airline issued incorrect tickets during flight rescheduling in 2020, causing mental distress and financial loss to the passenger. The case highlights the legal responsibility of service providers.
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.
A Bengaluru court ruled that Fala Holidays must refund Rs 1.5 lakh, plus interest and compensation to Hafeez Pasha, misled by a fake lucky draw offer. After persistent pressure to buy a costly membership without service, Pasha sought justice through the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which found the company guilty of unfair practices.
The Supreme Court strongly criticised a 69-year-old senior advocate for cheating someone of Rs.1.68 crore by pretending to be a land broker. Rejecting his plea to quash the case, the Court said, “Shocking! You acted like a land broker.”
A PIL in the Kerala High Court challenges the arbitrary pricing of multiplex movie tickets, highlighting consumer exploitation through dynamic pricing models without regulatory oversight. Filed by Advocate Manu Nair, the petition argues for government intervention under existing cinema laws, citing disparities with other Indian states that have implemented price controls. A hearing is scheduled for July 1.
The Supreme Court has upheld the validity of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provisions, ruling that pecuniary jurisdiction must be based on the actual amount paid for goods or services, not the compensation claimed.
