CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,

1986
By :Dr.DAYANAND B.SHETTY

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION

ACT, 1986-ORIGINS AND GENISIS

The industrial revolution and the development in the

international trade and commerce has led to the vast
expansion of business and trade, as a result of which a
variety of consumer goods have appeared in the market to
cater to the needs of the consumers and a host of services
have been made available.
The advertisements of goods and services in television,
newspapers and magazines influence the demand for the
same by the consumers though there may be
manufacturing defects or imperfections or short comings in
the quality, quantity and the purity of the goods or there
may be deficiency in the services rendered.

OBJECTS

The Act seeks to provide for better

protection of the interests of Consumers .It
is a benevolent legislation intended to
protect the consumers from exploitation
by unscrupulous manufacturers and
traders of consumer goods.

One of the main objects of the Act is to

provide speedy and simple redressal to
consumer disputes and for that a quasi-judicial
machinery is sought to be set up at the
district, State and Central level.These quasijudicial bodies are required to observe the
principles of natural justice and have been
empowered to give relief of a specific nature
and
to
award,
wherever
appropriate,
compensation to consumers. Penalties for noncompliance of the orders given by the quasijudicial bodies have also been provided.

The object and purpose of enacting the Act is to

render simple, inexpensive and speedy remedy to the
consumers with complaints against defective goods
and deficient services and the benevolent piece of
legislation intended to protect a large body of
consumers from exploitation would be defeated.Prior
to the Act, consumers were required to approach the
Civil Court for securing justice for the wrong done to
them and it is known fact that decision in suit takes
years. Under the Act, consumers are provided with an
alternative, efficacious and speedy remedy.As such,
the Consumer forum is an alternative forum
established under the Act to discharge the functions
of a Civil Court.

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,

1986 -OBJECTS

It seeks, inter alia, to promote and protect the rights of

consumers such as(a) the right to be protected against marketing of goods
which are hazardous to life and property;
(b) the right to be informed about the quality, quantity,
potency, purity, standard and price of goods to protect the
consumer against unfair trade practices;
(c) the right to be assured, wherever possible, access to an
authority of goods at competitive prices;
(d) the right to be heard
(e) the right to seek redressal against unfair trade practices
or unscrupulous exploitation of consumers; and
(f) right to consumer education.

Complainant
2 (b)"complainant" means (i) a consumer; or
(ii) any voluntary consumer association registered
under the Companies Act,1956 or under any other
law for the time being in force; or
(iii) the Central Government or any State
Government;
[(iv) one or more consumers, where there are
numerous consumers having the same interest;
(v) in case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or
representative ;who or which makes a complaint;

Complaint
2 (c)Complaint means any allegation in writing made by a
complainant thati)an unfair trade practice or a restrictive trade practice adopted by any
trade or service provider.
ii) the goods bought by him or agreed to be bought by him suffers
from one more defect.
iii) the services hired or availed of or agreed to be hired
or availed of suffer from deficiency in any respect .
iv) a trader or the service provider, as the case may be,
has charged for the goods or for the services mentioned in the
complaint, a price in excess of the price.

Who is a Consumer ?

2 (d)consumer" means any person who(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has
been paid or promised or partly paid and partly
promised, but does not include a person who
obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial
purpose; or
(ii) hires or avails of any services for a consideration
which has been paid or promised or partly paid and
partly promised,
hires or avails of the services for consideration paid
or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or
under any system of deferred payment,

Who is not a Consumer ?

Any person who obtains the goods for
resale or commercial purposes is not a
consumer.
When
goods are bought to resell or
commercially exploit them, such buyer or
user is not a consumer under the Act.

Person Buying Goods For Self Employment Is A

Consumer -When goods are bought for commercial purposes
and such purchase satisfy the following criteria :
- the goods are used by the buyer himself;
- exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood;
- by means of self-employment,
then such use would not be termed as use for commercial
purposes under the Act, and the user is recognised as a
consumer.
Examples :
1. A buys a truck for plying it as a public carrier by himself, A is
a consumer.
2. A buys a truck and hires a driver to ply it, A is not a
consumer.

Smt. Pushpa Meena v. Shah Enterprises

(Rajasthan) Ltd. (1991) 1 CPR 229.
A jeep was purchased to run it as a taxi.
The question was whether the buyer of the
jeep was a consumer under the Act.
The Rajasthan State Commission held that
to use the jeep as a taxi with the object to
earn profits was a commercial purpose, and
therefore, the buyer/user was not a
consumer within the meaning of the Act.

CONSUMER DISPUTE
2 (e)Consumer dispute" means a dispute
where the person against whom a complaint
has been made, denies or disputes the
allegations contained in the complaint;
A claim for builders failure to refund money
to a buyer for non-possession of a flat is a
consumer dispute.

DEFECT
2 (f)"defect" means any fault, imperfection
or shortcoming in the quality, quantity,
potency,
purity or standard which is required to be
maintained by or under any law for the time
being in force or [under any contract,
express or implied or]as is claimed by the
trader in any manner whatsoever in relation
to any goods;

DEFICIENCY UNDER CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT ,1986

2(g)"deficiency"
means
any
fault,
imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in
the quality, nature and manner of
performance which is required to be
maintained by or under any law for the time
being in force or has been undertaken to be
performed by a person in pursuance of a
contract or otherwise in relation to any
service;

Services Defined

2 (0) "service" means service of any description

which is made available to potential users and
includes the provision of facilities in connection
with banking, financing, insurance, transport,
processing, supply of electrical or other energy,
board or lodging or both, [housing construction]
entertainment, amusement or the purveying of
news or other information, but does not include
the rendering of any service free of charge or
under a contract of personal service;

Service :Three Parts

The definition of `service' in Section 2(1)(o) of the

Act can be split up into three parts:The main part - explanatory in nature and defines
service to mean service of any description which is
made available to the potential users.
The inclusionary part -expressly includes the
provision of facilities in connection with banking,
financing, insurance, transport, or the purveying of
news or other information ,etc .
The exclusionary part -excludes rendering of any
service free of charge or under a contract of
personal service.

Jacob Mathew v/s State of

Punj

The Supreme Court in Jacob Mathew v/s State of Punjab held

that the main clause in section 2 (1) (o) of the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986, defining service itself is very wide by the use of the word
any.
It applies to any service made available to potential users. The
words any and potential are significant. Both are of wide
amplitude. The dictionary meaning of any isoneorsomeorall. The
Blacks law dictionary defines any asalloreveryorsomeorone.
So any is used in a very wide sense extending from one to all.
The judgment serves to widen an already wide term.
Presently the ambit of deficiency of services has been widened and
accordingly this has been used to cover various areas and services
.Some of the areas where the term services are applied are as under:-

goods means goods as defined in the

Sale of Goods Act, 1930 (3 of 1930);

j) manufacturer

means a person who(i) makes or manufactures any goods or parts

thereof; or
(ii) does not make or manufacture any goods but
assembles parts thereof made or manufactured
by others and claims the end product to be
goods manufactured by himself; or
(iii) puts or causes to be put his own mark on
any goods made or manufactured by any other
manufacturer and claims such goods to be
goods made or manufactured by himself.

RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICE

Price fixing or output restraint redelivery/flow of supplies
to impose unjustified costs/restrictions on consumers.
Collusive tendering; market fixing territorially among
competing suppliers, depriving consumers of free
choice, fair competition.
Supplying only to particular distributors or on condition of
sale only within a territory.
Delaying in supplying goods/services leading to rise in
price.
Requiring a consumer to buy/hire any goods or services
as a pre-condition for buying/hiring other goods or
services.

UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICE

Adopting unfair methods or deception to promote sale,
use or supply of goods or services e.g.
Misleading public about the price
Charging above MRP printed.
Misleading public about anothers goods or services.
Falsely claiming a sponsorship, approval or affiliation.
Offering misleading warranty or guarantee.

Byford v. S.S. Srivastava(1993) II CPR 83

(NCDRC)].

B issued an advertisement that a person could

enter the contest by booking a Premier Padmini
car. S purchased the car and thus entered the
contest. He was declared as winner of the draw
and was thus entitled to the two tickets from New
Delhi to New York and back. S filed a complaint
alleging that the ticket was not delivered to him.
The National Commission held that S was not a
consumer in this context. He paid for the car and
got it. B was not liable so far as the contract of
winning a lottery was concerned.

+
Premier luxury car manufacturer Mercedes
Benz and one of its Chennai-based dealers
have been ordered by the national
consumer commission to pay Rs 2 lakh as
damages to a customer for selling him a
used demo car.
"Selling of used demo car without the
knowledge of the customer amounts to an
unfair trade practice within the Consumer
Protection (CP) Act," the National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission said.

Forum Raps Hiring Co For Unfair Trade Practice,

Developer For Deficiency In Service

A consumer forum recently held a recruitment

company guilty of indulging in unfair trade
practice after it found the firm was falsely
advertising that it was recognized by the
Directorate General of Shipping. The forum
directed Pandayan Seven Seas Pvt Ltd to pay a
compensation of Rs 25,000 and a refund of Rs
20,000 to Kharghar resident Vikas Gaikwad for
failing to get him a shipping job. The forum relied
on information that Gaikwad received from the
Directorate General of Shipping, which stated
that there was no such recognition.

Gaikwad filed a complaint before the

additional suburban Mumbai consumer
disputes redressal forum on August 26 last
year. He said he approached the agency
on April 16 in 2013 after seeing an
advertisement in a Marathi daily that
guaranteed shipping jobs and required to
no fees.

Gaikwad approached the agency and was told to

pay Rs 200 for an interview and submit classes
10 and 12 marksheets. On April 18, 2013,
Gaikwad submitted all documents and was
interviewed. An agency representative told him
he was qualified for the job of a safety officer and
his monthly salary would be Rs 40,000. He was
assured free boarding and food on the vessel.
Gaikwad was told he would have to pay Rs
11,236 for his Indian Continuous Discharge
Certificate and Rs 6,250 towards medical tests.

After depositing the amount and undergoing tests,

on April 21, 2013, Gaikwad was informed he
would get a letter in 60 days. But two months
later, when he received no letter, he inquired with
the agency. He was assured he would get the
letter in a week. When no such thing happened,
Gaikwad sought a refund. The firm gave him a
refund cheque, but it was dishonoured. Gaikwad
alleged there were several others like him. The
forums order was passed ex parte, after the
agency did not file a reply.

(q) trader in relation to any goods means

a person who sells or distributes any goods
for sale and includes the manufacturer
thereof, and where such goods are sold or
distributed in package form, includes the
packer thereof;

FORUM & JURISDICTION

District Forum - Claims less than or equal Rs.20 lacs.

State Commission -Claim more than Rs.20 lacs & less

than Rs.1 crore & appeals.

National Commission-Claim equal to Rs.1 crore &

appeals.

13. Procedure on receipt of complaint

(1) The District Forum shall, on receipt of a
complaint, if it relates to any goods (a) refer a copy of the complaint to the
opposite party mentioned in the complaint
directing him to give his version of the case
within a period of thirty days or such
extended period not exceeding fifteen days
as may be granted by the District Forum;

(b) where the opposite party on receipt of a

complaint referred to him under clause (a)
denies or disputes the allegations contained
in the complaint, or omits or fails to take
any action to represent his case within the
time given by the District Forum, the
District Forum shall proceed to settle the
consumer dispute in the manner specified
in clauses (c) to (g);

c) where the complaint alleges a defect in the goods

which cannot be determined without proper analysis or
test of the goods, the District Forum shall obtain a
sample of the goods from the complainant, seal it and
authenticate it in the manner prescribed and refer the
sample so sealed to the appropriate laboratory along
with a direction that such laboratory make an analysis
with a view to finding out whether such goods suffer
from any defect alleged in the complaint or suffer from
any other defect and to report its findings thereon to
the District Forum within a period of forty-five days of
the receipt of the reference or within such extended
period as may be granted by the District Forum;

b) where the opposite party, on receipt of a

copy of the complaint, referred to him under
clause (a) denies or disputes the allegations
contained in the complaint, or omits or fails
to take any action to represent his case
within the time given by the District Forum,
the District Forum shall proceed to settle
the consumer dispute.

(i) on the basis of evidence brought to its

notice by the complainant and the opposite
party, where the opposite party denies or
disputes the allegation contained in the
complaint, or
(ii) on the basis of evidence brought to its
notice by the complainant where the
opposite party omits or fails to take any
action to represent his case within the time
given by the Forum.

14. Finding of the District Forum

1) If, after the proceeding conducted under

section 13, the District Forum is satisfied
that the goods complained against suffer
from any of the defects specified in the
complaint or that any of the allegations
contained in the complaint about the
services are proved, it shall issue an order
to the opposite party directing him to 1[do]
one or more of the following things,
namely,-

(a) to remove the defect pointed out by the

appropriate laboratory from the goods in question;
(b) to replace the goods with new goods of similar
description which shall be free from any defect;
(c) to return to the complainant the price, or, as
the case may be, the charges paid by the
complainant;
(d) to pay such amount as may be awarded by it
as compensation to the consumer for any loss or
injury suffered by the consumer due to the
negligence of the opposite party.

2[(e) to remove the defects or deficiencies

in the services in question;
(f) to discontinue the unfair trade practice
or the restrictive trade practice or not to
repeat them;
(g) not to offer the hazardous goods for
sale;
(h) to withdraw the hazardous goods from
being offered for sale;
(i) to provide for adequate costs to parties.

5. Appeal

Any person aggrieved by an order made by

the District Forum may prefer an appeal
against such order to the State Commission
within a period of thirty days from the date of
the order, in such form and manner as may
be prescribed:
PROVIDED that the State Commission may
entertain an appeal after the expiry of the
said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that
there was sufficient cause for not finding it
within that period.

24. Finality of order

Every order of a District Forum, State

Commission or the National Commission
shall, if no appeal has been preferred
against such order under the provisions of
this Act, be final.

2[24]A. Limitation period

(1)
The
District
Forum,
the
State
Commission or the National Commission
shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed
within two years from the date on which the
cause of action has arisen.

2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a complaint may be entertained after

the period specified in sub-section (1), if the
complainant satisfies the District Forum, the State
Commission or the National Commission, as the
case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not
filing the complaint within such period:
PROVIDED that no such complaint shall be
entertained unless the National Commission, the
State Commission or the District Forum, as the
case may be, records its reasons for condoning
such delay.

Medical services comes under

Consumer Protection Act, 1986
The doctor owes certain duties to the
patient who consults him for illness.
The
Supreme Court in
Parmanand
Katariavs. Union of India every doctor,
at the governmental hospital or elsewhere,
has a professional obligation to extend his
services with due expertise for protecting
life .

Doctors Service: Reasonable

care

In ,Laxmanvs. Trimback, the Supreme Court

held that the duty owed by a doctor towards
his patient, is to bring to his task a reasonable
degree of skill and knowledge and to exercise
a reasonable degree of care. When there is
reduction of reasonable care then it is case of
deficiency of service .
The doctor is not liable for every injury suffered
by a patient. He is liable for only those that are
a consequence of a breach of his duty. A
deficiency in this duty results in negligence.

Indian Medical Association vs

V.P. Shantha & Ors

In Indian Medical Association vs V.P. Shantha

& Ors ,it was held medical services comes
under Consumer Protection Act 1986.
Service rendered to a patient by a medical
practitioner (except where the doctor renders
service free of charge to every patient or
under a contract of personal service), by way
of consultation, diagnosis and treatment, both
medicinal and surgical, would fall within the
ambit of 'service' as defined in Section 2(1) (o)
of the Act.

Lawyers Services under

Consumer Protection Act ,1986
K.Gandhi v/s M.Mathais, the National
Commission in its judgment had contended
when a party engages a lawyer, there
comes into operation a bilateral contract
where the lawyer renders services in
consideration for the fees, which he
receives.
It held the definition of service as very
wide and capable of bringing lawyers and
other professionals under its domain.

Narinder Kumar Suneja v R.K. Goel[III (2009)

CPJ 35 (NC)]
Date of Decision: 14.05.2009

In revision, the petitioner who was a lawyer

claimed that he was entitled to retain the
fee which he took from the respondent
since the respondent had executed the
power of attorney/vakalatnama and handed
over some papers to the petitioner in
connection with a proposed case to be filed.
He claimed having wasted valuable time
when the respondent met and sought
expert advice..

The National Commission referred to the order of the

State Commission which, in turn, referred to the
District Forum's order holding that the opposite party
(petitioner) was not entitled to retain the fee when he
did not perform the duty for which the fee was meant
and that a complaint made by the complainant to the
Bar Council related only to misconduct on the part of
its member (i.e., petitioner) whereas the Consumer
Fora were required to determine whether proper
service had been rendered or not. The Commission
relied upon D.K. Gandhi v M. Mathias [III (2007) CPJ
337 (NC)] in holding that deficiency in service by
lawyers was covered under the CPA

Bhupesh Khurana and others v.Vishwa

Budha Parishad and others

In this case, it
was held
that imparting
education falls within the ambit of service .The
verdict was in response to complaint fielded by
12 students, who joined the Buddhist Mission
Dental College in Bihar. The College in its
admission advertisements for the BDS Course,
gave an impression that it is affiliated to Magadh
University and recognized by the Dental Council
of India. After joining the College the students to
their dismay found that it was neither affiliated to
Magadh University nor it is recognized by the
Council.

As a result, they not only lost two academic

years but also the money spent on fees,
hostel charges, etc. Holding the service
rendered by the College to be deficient, the
Commission directed it to refund all
admission expenses with interest and pay
compensation for the loss of two years and,
also the cost of the petition

Imparting Education
:Service

,.The apex consumer court resolved the basic

question whether educational institutions
come under the ambit of consumer courts
and held that they too are liable for deficient
services rendered.The National Commission
observed Imparting of education by an
educational institution for consideration falls
within the ambit of service as defined in the
Consumer Protection Act. Fees are paid for
service to be rendered by way of imparting
education by the educational institutions.

House Construction
:Service
House construction is a service under the
Consumer Protection Act and comes under
the jurisdiction of consumer courts
In Lucknow Development Authority v
M. K. Gupta , Supreme Court has stated
that when a statutory authority develops
land or allots a site or constructs a house
for the benefit of a common man, it is as
such, service as by a builder or
contractor.

RTI applicant is a
consumer

Whether a citizen can seek remedy under the

Consumer Protection Act 1986 for any deficiency of
services provided under the Right to Information Act
2005 ?

Whether the citizen who is filing an application

under the RTI Act can be considered as a consumer?

If he is indeed a consumer, whether failure to

furnish information under the RTI be considered as
deficiency service for which a citizen can avail of
remedy by approaching Consumer forum?

Deficiency of Service applicable

under RTI

In a case of Dr. S. P.Thirumala Rao vs.

Municipal Commissioner, Mysore City
Municipal Corporation, Mysore , Dr
Thirumala Rao ,a consulting physician was
denied information on the grounds of
excessive workload .He approached the
District Consumer Forum which gave a
decision in his favour by awarding damages
of Rs 500 and cost of Rs 100 to the
defendant Corporation .

PIO not providing information

:Deficiency of Service

The National Consumer Forum upheld the

decision of State Forum on the following
grounds :1)By paying RTI fees a citizen becomes a
consumer.
2)The Person designated as the Public
Information Officer under the RTI is the service
provider .
3)If the PIO fails to provide information within
the requisite 30 days u/s 7 (1)of the RTI Act
2005,it is deemed to be deficiency of service .

Over draft facility is a service

Vimal Chandra Grover v Bank of India ,it

was held by the Supreme Court ,that
overdraft facility is certainly a part of the
banking and falls within the meaning of
service as provided in section 2(1)(o) of
the Act.
The bank argued that the appellant who took
overdraft facility from the bank by pledging
shares, is not a consumer within the
meaning of the Consumer Protection Act.

Dishonour of Overdraft :Deficiency

of Service

The Supreme Court repelled the arguments

of the bank and held that bank is rendering
service by providing overdraft facilities to a
consumer,
which
is
not
without
consideration and hence the applicant was
a consumer .

SBI vs. N. Raveendran Nair it was held

that dishonour of demand draft due to the
fault of the bank comes under the purview
of deficiency of service.

[S.P. Goelv.Collector of
Stamps(1995) III CPR 684 (SC)].

A presented before the Sub-Registrar a document

claiming it to be a will for registrationwho sent it to
the Collector of Stamps for action. The matter remain
pending for about six years. In the meantime A filed a
complaint under the Consumer Protection Act alleging
harrassment by the Sub-Registrar and Collector and
prayed for compensation. The National Commission
held the view that A was not a consumer under the
CPA. Because there was no hiring of services by the
complainant for consideration and because a
Government official doing his duty as functionary of
the State under law could not be said to be rendering a
service to the complainant.

PROSPECTIVE INVESTORS ARE NOT

CONSUMERS AS NO SERVICE HAS BEEN
PROVIDED

The appellant, Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund

(MSMF) came out with a scheme of public issue
by advertisements.
The respondent Kartick Das, at this stage, moved
the Calcutta District Forum seeking a restraint
order on the public issue from being floated.
The grounds were that MSMF had not complied
with certain regulations of the SEBI; the basis of
allotment was arbitrary unfair and unjust; and
that MSMF was seeking to collect money by
misleading the public.

Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund vs Kartick Das

The Forum granted an injunction, as an interim

order , against MSMF .
Under Special Leave filed by MSMF , the Supreme
Court held that the respondent was not a consumer
within the meaning of the Act.
The shares are not goods at the stage of application
for its allotment. As the issue was yet to open, the
respondent was only a prospective investor of future
goods, when the complaint in the Forum was made.
Neither there was purchase of goods nor any service
was hired for a consideration as required by Section 2
(1)(o)of the Act.

Conclusion

It has been observed that the area of services

has been widened and also it terms of
deficiency of service the State , National
Commission and Supreme Court are taking a
strict interpretation of the same .This augurs
well for the consumer as the nature of products
and services have increased manifold. Also the
strict interpretation service and deficiency in
service shall also go a long way in empowering
consumers thereby fulfilling in the provisions of
Consumer Protection Act 1986.

Railways liability for theft

Railways can also be held liable for thefts under this

Act which was held in the case ,Union Of India And
Ors. V Sanjiv Dilsukhrai Dave And Anr. In this
case the passengers were travelling in a reserved
sleeper class in the Girnar Express from Junagadh to
Ahmedabad. They put their luggage, bags below their
berths and went to sleep. Between Dandhuka and
Dholka Stations some unknown miscreants entered
the compartments and lifted one of the bags and ran
away. In this case they contended that there was
deficiency in service on the part of the Western
Railways, the complainants suffered a loss of
Rs.
50,150/-.

The District Forum held that there was

deficiency in service on the part of the
railways and awarded damages for pain,
tension and loss of valuable ornaments along
with interest @ 18% p.a. and costs. State
Commission
in
affirmed
the
same
view.TheNational Commission upheld the
order of the State Commission with the slight
modification to the rate of interest. The State
Commission awarded at 18%, which was
reduced to 9%.

A patient treated free of cost in a hospital

will still be a consumer as per the Consumer
Protection Act if the person buys medicines
from the nursing home's pharmacy, the
national consumer forum has ruled, giving a
Rs 11 lakh compensation for a death..

A patient treated free of cost in a charity or other hospital

will still be a consumer as per the Consumer Protection Act
if the person buys medicines from the nursing home's
pharmacy, the national consumer forum has ruled.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
gave the ruling while awarding a compensation of Rs 11
lakh to the parents of a 16-year-old boy, who died due to
medical negligence committed by a hospital during his
treatment.
The forum gave the ruling dismissing the contentions of
the doctor and the hospital that no payment had been
taken from the patient and so he was not a consumer as
per the C P Act.

The hospital and the medical shop being

run as an integrated facility by one family
disproves that no payment was taken by the
doctor from the complainants because
payment to one becomes payment to both,"
the NCDRC bench of Justice R K Batra and
Member Vinay Kumar ruled.

REFERENCES
http://ncdrc.nic.in/1_1.html.(As accessed on 10 th May 2014)
Jacob Mathew v/s State of Punjab (2005) 6 SCC 1
Parmanand Katara vs Union Of India & Ors ,1989 AIR 2039, 1989 SCR (3) 997
Laxman v Trimback,AIR 1969 SC 128
Indian Medical Association vs V.P. Shantha & Ors 1996 AIR 550, 1995 SCC (6)
651
D.K. Gandhi Ps, National vs M. Mathias III (2007) CPJ 337 NC
Indiankanoon.org/doc/427110 (As accessed on 12 th May 2014)
Lucknow Development Authority v M. K. Gupta ,(1994) 1 SCC 243
Dr. S. P.Thirumala Rao vs. Municipal Commissioner, Mysore City Municipal
Corporation, Mysore http://164.100.72.12/ncdrcrep/judgement/00RP197505.html
Head Post Master Ponnai ,Kerala v Ayyappan II 2009 CPJ 330 NC
Vimal Chandra Grover vs.Bank of India [2000 (2) CPJ 11(SC): AIR 2000 SC 2181
SBI vs. N. Raveendran Nair [1992 (2) CPR 400],
The Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund vs Kartick Das,1986-1995 Consumer 609 (NS)