An Overview of the Changes to be Introduced by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Must Read

Explained: The Scope of Article 21 During the Era of COVID-19

“One’s right to self, their body, their health, and their livelihoods is inherent to living a meaningful human life, Human...

Why Are the Big Techs of Silicon Valley Accused of Anti-Competitive Behaviours?

The big tech giants of the Silicon Valley are facing major challenges with relation to their monopolistic powers after...

KSK announces Sanjay Kumar as a Partner for Pharma & Life Sciences Practice

New Partner for KSK's Pharma & Life Sciences Practice King Stubb & Kasiva recently announced that Mr Sanjay Kumar has...

The Debate Between IPR and Competition Law Explained

There are various market processes or structures that govern market scenario. For simplicity, this paper focuses on two mechanisms:...

The Competition Law Regime and Re-Tooling Patent Pools In India

The adversity to acquire licenses of various patented technologies can thwart the commercialization as well as the development of...

Solving Healthcare Issues Using Blockchain Technology

In troubled times that follow a pandemic, almost all nations are forced to take stock of the gaps present...
King Stubb & Kasiva Advocates & Attorneys
King Stubb & Kasiva Advocates & Attorneys
King Stubb & Kasiva is one of the leading law firms with PAN India presence. KSK represents a large number of Indian business houses, multinational corporations, banking & financial institutions, small, medium & large Indian and International companies and start-ups across the country.

Follow us

The first consumer protection legislation Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (‘old act’) was introduced with the primary objective of protecting consumer rights. However, with the advent of technology and the introduction of e-commerce and various other mechanisms of conducting business, an overhaul of the existing legislation seemed necessary and prudent in order to better protect modern-day consumers. Over the past 20 years, the consumer landscape in India has seen a paradigm starting with the economy opening up in the early 1990s to the advent of online marketplaces and e-commerce. The affordability and propensity to spend of the average Indian consumer as well have gone up. Therefore, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (‘the Act’) has been passed which is an attempt to update the old act by replicating the same. The majority of the provisions of the Act have been notified vide notification[1] dated 15th July 2020 and has been brought into effect from 20th July 2020. Some of the main features of the Act are:-

  1. The erstwhile District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (‘DCDRF’) has been renamed as District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘DCDRC’/’District Commission’).
  2. The Opposite Party must now deposit 50% of the amount ordered by the District Commission before preferring an appeal to the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘SCDRC’/’State Commission’) as opposed to the previous ceiling was of a maximum of Rs. 25,000/-, which has now been done away with.
  3. The period of limitation for preferring an appeal to the State Commission from an order of the District Commission has been increased from 30 days under the old Act to 45 days under the Act. The power to condone the delay, however, has been retained.
  4. The SCDRC shall now have a minimum of 1 President and 4 Members.
  5. The original pecuniary jurisdiction of the consumer commissions has now been revised as follows:
  6. DCDRC shall be up to Rs. 1 crore;
  7. SCDRC from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 10 crores; and
  8. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘NCDRC’/’National Commission’) to be more than Rs. 10 crores.
  9. The complainant can now institute a complaint within the territorial jurisdiction of the Commission where the complainant resides or personally works for gain[2] over and above what was provided earlier in the old Act.
  10. The provisions in Sections 49(2) and 59(2) of the Act empower both the State Commission and National Commission to deem any terms of the contract between the consumer and the service provider/manufacturer as the case may be, which are unfair to any consumer, to be ineffective and void. This is a new provision/power vested upon the SCDRC and the NCDRC which was not a part of the old Act.
  11. There is now a provision for a second appeal to the NCDRC which has been provided for under section 51 clause (3) of the Act in the event that there is a substantial question of law involved.
  12. The NCDRC can still exercise its power of revision under section 58 clause (1) sub-clause (b) of the Act and by the SCDRC can exercise the same power under section 47 clause (1) sub-clause (b) of the Act.
  13. The NCDRC, SCDRC, and the DCDRC can still exercise their powers of review which have been conferred to them under sections 40, 50 and 60 of the Act.
  14. The NCDRC is empowered to hear appeals against orders of the Central Authority and the same is provided for under Section 58 of the Act.
  15. The period of limitation for filing a complaint is still 2 years and there is a provision for condonation of delay and the same is provided for under Section 69.
  16. The provision given under Section 70 of the Act provides for administrative control of the SCDRC over the DCDRC and that of the NCDRC over the SCDRC. It also provides for an investigation into any allegations against the President and members of a particular SCDRC / DCDRC. The provision also provides for submission of an inquiry report to the State Government concerned along with a copy to the Central Government[3] for their needful action.
  17. The provision under Section 71 of the Act confers the power of execution on the commissions as provided Under Order XXI, The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’)[4] with such limitation as provided in the Act itself.
  18. The provision under Section 74 of the Act gives statutory recognition to mediation and provides a mechanism for promoting mediation as a mechanism of redressal for consumer disputes.
  19. An action for product liability may now be brought by a complainant against a product manufacturer or a product service provider or a product seller, as the case may be, for any harm caused to him on account of a defective product[5].
  20. The Act by way of Chapter III provides for the establishment of a Central Authority to regulate matters relating to unfair trade practices, consumer rights violations, and false/misleading advertisements which are prejudicial/detrimental to the interests of public and consumers and also to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers as a separate class. The Central Authority shall also be equipped with an Investigation Wing which shall be headed by a Director-General for the purpose of conducting inquiry or investigation under the Act at the discretion of the Central Authority.


The Act is a welcome move as it seems to cover the lacunae of the old Act and it is being introduced during a crucial phase wherein consumers and their rights need to be protected as the global markets are becoming more and more consumer-centric. The Act vests more power on the District Commission, State Commission while also revising their respective pecuniary jurisdictions thereby reducing the workload of the National Commission. With the implementation of the provisions of the Act, the popular phrase ‘buyer beware’ might be replaced to ‘seller beware’ or ‘manufacturer beware’ in case they are found in contravention of the Act considering the protection that is being offered to the consumers.



[2] Section 2, Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

[3] Section 70 & Section 71, Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

[4] Section 71, Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

[5] Section 2(34) and Section 2(35) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

This Article is written by Smita Paliwal, Partner and Rajeev Rambhatla, Head-Hyderabad, KSK Advocates and Attorneys. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -