Tap here to pick an attempt, marks or topic, and to sort. It makes finding questions easy!
16
December 2025Q. 1(iv)4 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below :
Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(iv)Enumerate the procedure for filing complaint before Consumer Commission.
The Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 provides for procedure for filing complaints before Consumer Commission as follows: -A complaint:
•Should be in writing
•Can be filed in a regular way (offline)
•Can be filed online through official portal – http://edaakhil.nic.in/ A complaint can be presented by the complainant in person or by his agent. It can even be sent by registered post along with the court fee.
Normally three copies of the complaint are required to be submitted out of which one retained for the official purpose, one is forwarded to the opposite party and one is the for the complainant.
In case the number of opposite parties is more correspondingly more copies of the complaint are required.
Where a Complaint is filed in the National Commission, it shall be filed in two sets and the sets for the Opposite parties or respondents shall be filed within a week of admission of such case or issuance of notice to the opposite parties.
Every complaint shall clearly contain particulars of dispute and the relief claimed and shall also be accompanied by copies of such documents as are necessary to prove the claim made in the complaint.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2025, Q. 1(iv) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2025Q. 1(ii)3 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below :
Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(ii)State the Pecuniary jurisdiction of Commissions according to Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021.
According to Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021 prescribed the following Pecuniary Jurisdiction:
•Jurisdiction of District Commission: District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed fifty lakh rupees.
•Jurisdiction of State commission: State Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds fifty lakh but does not exceed two crore rupees.
•Jurisdiction of National Commission: National Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds two crore rupees.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2025, Q. 1(ii) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2023Q. 1(ii)5 marksSyllabus 2022
Tiya purchases a laptop for her sister Siya from HP. The laptop had initial installation issues, when taken to the manufacturer’s service centre defect in the laptop was detected. The company refuses to redress the issues faced by Siya on the pretext that she was not the consumer. On the basis of the above case, answer the following questions :
(ii)If this laptop was purchased through amazon, explain the duty of the e-commerce giant in case of grievance.
According to the Consumer Protection (E-commerce) Rules 2020, every ecommerce entity shall establish an adequate grievance redressal mechanism having regard to the number of grievances ordinarily received by such entity from India, and shall appoint a grievance officer for consumer grievance redressal and shall display the name, contact details, designation of such officer.
Further, every e-commerce entity shall ensure that the grievance officer acknowledge the receipt of any consumer complaint within forty-eight hours and redresses the complaint within one month from the date of receipt of the complaint.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2023, Q. 1(ii) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2024Q. 3(b)5 marksSyllabus 2022
(b)Lokesh was suffering from a serious ailment. He was admitted to a Well-Known private hospital in Gurugram. He was subjected to various tests. Even after diagnosis and subsequent treatment, his condition deteriorated. The doctor advised surgery during which Lokesh collapsed and died. Sushma his wife, preferred a claim for compensation of ₹ 50 lakhs under the Consumer Protection Act for deficiency in services. The hospital authority contented that medical profession was being unnecessarily hounded. Is the contention tenable ? Refer the relevant case law as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dr Harish Kumar Khurana vs. Joginder Singh (CA 7380 of 2009)
judgement dated September 8, 2021 held that medical professionals cannot be held negligent merely because the treatment is not successful or patient dies during surgery. Every death of a patient cannot on the face of it be considered as death due to medical negligence unless there is material on record to suggest to that effect. It is necessary that the hospital and the doctors are required to exercise sufficient care in treating the patient in all circumstance. However, in unfortunate cases though death may occur and if it is alleged to be due to medical negligence and a claim in that regard is made, it is necessary that sufficient material or medical evidence should be available before the adjudicating authority to arrive at a conclusion. The accident during the course of medical or surgical treatment has a wider meaning. Ordinarily an accident means an unintended and unforeseen injurious occurrence, something that does not occur in the usual course of events or that could not be reasonably anticipated.
In the light of above case, contention of Sushma is not tenable.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2024, Q. 3(b) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2025Q. 1(iii)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below :
Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(iii)Is it constitutional to determine pecuniary jurisdiction based on the amount paid and not on the basis of compensation claimed ? Does this classification violate Article 14 of the Indian Constitution ?
The Supreme Court of India in Rutu Mihir Panchal vs Union of India (2025) held that Section 34, 47 and 58 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 are constitutional which determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of consumer forums (District, State and National Commissions) based on the consideration paid for goods or services and not on the compensation claimed by the complainant.
The Court held that the classification based on the value of consideration paid is neither violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India nor Manifestly arbitrary. The Court emphasized that access to justice is preserved, since appeals to higher forums remain available.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2025, Q. 1(iii) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2025Q. 1(v)3 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below :
Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(v)What is the purpose behind referring to the Constitution and functioning of the Central Consumer Protection Council/Authority ?
The Supreme Court of India in Rutu Mihir Panchal vs Union of India 2025 observed that the purpose and object behind referring to the Constitution and functioning of the Central Consumer Protection Council and the Central Consumer Protection Authority is only to ensure that the regulatory regime for consumer protection is clearly identified, coordinated -if not centralized and declared to be duty bearers for effective functioning of consumer protection regime.
The Supreme Court held that the Council and Authority being statutory authorities having clear purpose and objects and vested with powers and functions must act effectively and in complete coordination to achieve the preambular object of the statute to protect the interest of consumers.
As they are impressed with statutory duty, their functioning will be subject to judicial review. Vibrant functioning of the Council and the Authority will subserve the purpose and object of the Parliament enacting the 2019 legislation.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2025, Q. 1(v) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2025Q. 1(v)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
Swastik Ayurved Pharma Limited is one of the largest producers of Herbal and Ayurvedic products in India. To expand its market share, Swastik regularly advertised the claimed benefits of its products.
These advertisements promoted the products as having medicinal properties and the ability to cure ailments without side effects. However, the advertisements lacked any scientific evidence to support such claims. Relying upon these advertisements, Rajeev, a consumer, purchased the products. The products, however, turned out to be ineffective and did not match the claims made in the advertisements.
Rajeev, the complainant, lodged a complaint with the Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of India, alleging that the advertisements released by the company were misleading, false, and deceptive, intended to misguide the general public, and in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Further, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) also found the advertisements to be misleading and in violation of its regulations. It was contended that the company and its directors should be held liable for such misleading and deceptive advertisements. The case was ultimately referred to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by way of a special leave to appeal.
From the above case study, answer the following questions as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(v)Distinguish between defect and deficiency under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
Defect 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 or product and the expression “defective” shall be construed accordingly.
[Section 2(10) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019] Deficiency 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 and includes — (I) any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer; and
(ii)deliberate withholding of relevant information by such person to the consumer. [Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019]
(2 Marks)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2025, Q. 1(v) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2025Q. 1(ii)4 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
Swastik Ayurved Pharma Limited is one of the largest producers of Herbal and Ayurvedic products in India. To expand its market share, Swastik regularly advertised the claimed benefits of its products.
These advertisements promoted the products as having medicinal properties and the ability to cure ailments without side effects. However, the advertisements lacked any scientific evidence to support such claims. Relying upon these advertisements, Rajeev, a consumer, purchased the products. The products, however, turned out to be ineffective and did not match the claims made in the advertisements.
Rajeev, the complainant, lodged a complaint with the Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of India, alleging that the advertisements released by the company were misleading, false, and deceptive, intended to misguide the general public, and in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Further, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) also found the advertisements to be misleading and in violation of its regulations. It was contended that the company and its directors should be held liable for such misleading and deceptive advertisements. The case was ultimately referred to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by way of a special leave to appeal.
From the above case study, answer the following questions as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(ii)Whether the false, misleading and deceptive advertisement may be treated as unfair trade practice ? Explain in detail.
According to Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Unfair Trade Practice means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provisions of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice including any of the following practices, which are related to the false, misleading and deceptive advertisements under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019:
Making any statement, whether orally or in writing or by visible representation including by means of electronic record, which-
(a)Falsely represents that the goods are of a particular standard, quality, quantity, grade, composition, style or model;
(b)Falsely represents that the services are of a particular standard, quality or grade;
(c)Represents that the goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance, characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits which such goods or services do not have;
(d)Makes a false or misleading representation concerning the need for, or the usefulness of, any goods or services;
(e)Permitting the publication of nay advertisement whether in any newspaper or otherwise, including by way of electronic record, for the sale or supply at a bargain price of goods or services etc.
Accordingly, if any advertisement which attracts the consumer, will be deemed misleading and violative of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that all advertisements must be truthful and not misleading or deceptive to the public. Further, such false, misleading and deceptive advertisements also violates the advertising standard Council of India regulations.
(4 Marks)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2025, Q. 1(ii) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2025Q. 1(i)4 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
Swastik Ayurved Pharma Limited is one of the largest producers of Herbal and Ayurvedic products in India. To expand its market share, Swastik regularly advertised the claimed benefits of its products.
These advertisements promoted the products as having medicinal properties and the ability to cure ailments without side effects. However, the advertisements lacked any scientific evidence to support such claims. Relying upon these advertisements, Rajeev, a consumer, purchased the products. The products, however, turned out to be ineffective and did not match the claims made in the advertisements.
Rajeev, the complainant, lodged a complaint with the Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of India, alleging that the advertisements released by the company were misleading, false, and deceptive, intended to misguide the general public, and in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Further, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) also found the advertisements to be misleading and in violation of its regulations. It was contended that the company and its directors should be held liable for such misleading and deceptive advertisements. The case was ultimately referred to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by way of a special leave to appeal.
From the above case study, answer the following questions as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(i)Who is a ‘‘consumer’’ under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ? Can Rajeev be considered a consumer in this case ?
According to Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Consumer means any person who-
(i)Buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
(ii)Hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.
Explanation. - For the purposes of this clause, -a. the expression “commercial purpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self-employment; b. The expressions “buys any goods” and “hires or avails any services” includes offline or online transactions through electronic means or by teleshopping or direct selling or multi-level marketing.
Looking to the provision of Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Mr. Rajeev who purchased the advertised products relying upon the advertisements of Swastik Ayurved Pharma Ltd. is a consumer.
(4 Marks)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2025, Q. 1(i) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2023Q. 1(i)5 marksSyllabus 2022
Tiya purchases a laptop for her sister Siya from HP. The laptop had initial installation issues, when taken to the manufacturer’s service centre defect in the laptop was detected. The company refuses to redress the issues faced by Siya on the pretext that she was not the consumer. On the basis of the above case, answer the following questions :
(i)Can Siya be treated as a consumer as she is not the person who purchased the laptop ?
As per Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Consumer means any person who—
(i)buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
(ii)hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.
Thus, even if Siya has not purchased the laptop but she uses it with the approval of Tiya, her sister, so according to the definition Siya can be treated as a Consumer.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2023, Q. 1(i) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2023Q. 3(a)5 marksSyllabus 2022
(a)Trilok purchased a tractor from Jahanvi Limited for tilling the land but he used it during idle time for transportation of agricultural produce on hire. Some defects were developed in the engine of the tractor. He complained to Jahanvi Limited, but all in vain. Then he filed a suit in Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum for damages caused by the defects. Jahanvi Limited pleaded that Trilok is not a ‘consumer’ within the definition of section 2(i) (d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as he is using the tractor for commercial purposes.
Whether Trilok will succeed in his case ? Refer to relevant provision of Law in support of your answer with reference to case laws, if any ?
According to Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, consumer means any person who—
(i)buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
(ii)hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.
It may be noted that “commercial purpose" does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood, by means of self-employment.
Further, in the case of Bhupendra Jang Bahadur Gurna Vs. the Regional Manager & Others (II 1995 CPJ 139), the National Commission held that a tractor purchase primarily to fill the land of the purchaser and let out on hire during the idle time to fill the lands of others would not amount to Commercial use.
In the light of the above provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and decided case law, Trilok, will succeed in his own case. He is still a consumer within the definition of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2023, Q. 3(a) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2026Q. 2(a)5 marksSyllabus 2022
(a)Refresh & Co. released an advertisement claiming its drink “instantly cures fatigue and boosts immunity by 200%.” Joe, one of India’s top social media influencers, also endorsed it as a healthy drink. Against this, complaints were filed with the Central Authority under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. What directions and penalties can the Central Authority issue/impose against Refresh & Co. and Joe ?
Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provides that where the Central Authority is satisfied after investigation that any advertisement is false or misleading and is prejudicial to the interest of any consumer or is in contravention of consumer rights, it may, by order, issue directions to the concerned trader or manufacturer or endorser or advertiser or publisher, as the case may be, to discontinue such advertisement or to modify the same in such manner and within such time as may be specified in that order.
If the Central Authority is of the opinion that it is necessary to impose a penalty in respect of such false or misleading advertisement, by a manufacturer or an endorser, it may, by order, impose on manufacturer or endorser a penalty which may extend to ten lakh rupees. The Central Authority may, for every subsequent contravention by a manufacturer or endorser, impose a penalty, which may extend to fifty lakh rupees.
Where the Central Authority deems it necessary, it may, by order, prohibit the endorser of a false or misleading advertisement from making endorsement of any product or service for a period which may extend to one year. Central Authority may, for every subsequent contravention, prohibit such endorser from making endorsement in respect of any product or service for a period which may extend to three years.
Where the Central Authority is satisfied after investigation that any person is found to publish, or is a party to the publication of, a misleading advertisement, it may impose on such person a penalty which may extend to ten lakh rupees.
In view of the above provision, Refresh & Co. and Joe may be imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs (first contravention) and asked to discontinue such advertisement/endorsement. Joe, being endorser, may be prohibited from endorsement of any product/ service as stated above.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2026, Q. 2(a) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(vii)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(vii)State the constitution of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
Section 28 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 empowers the State Government to establish a District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, to be known as the District Commission, in each district of the State. State Government may also, if it deems fit, establish more than one District Commission in a district. Each District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission shall consist of -
(a)a President; and
(b)not less than two and not more than such number of members as may be prescribed, in consultation with the Central Government.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(vii) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2025Q. 1(i)3 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below :
Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(i)What is the Pecuniary jurisdiction of Commissions as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
Pecuniary Jurisdiction of Commissions under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 are as under:
•District Commission: According to section 34 of the Act, the District Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed one crore rupees.
•State Commission: According to section 47 of the Act, the State Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain— (i) complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration, exceeds rupees one crore, but does not exceed rupees ten crore: and
(ii)complaints against unfair contracts, where the value of goods or services paid as consideration does not exceed ten crore rupees;
•National Commission: According to section 58 of the Act, the National Commission shall have jurisdiction to entertain (i) complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds rupees ten crore: (ii) complaints against unfair contracts, where the value of goods or services paid as consideration exceeds ten crore rupees.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2025, Q. 1(i) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(i)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(i)Define Recognised Consumer Association as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
“Recognised Consumer Association” means any voluntary consumer association registered under any law for the time being in force. (Explanation to section 35(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(i) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(ii)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(ii)Whether Shardha Heights is a ‘Recognised Consumer Association’ as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ? Explain.
Yes, Shardha Heights, being a duly registered welfare society, is a “Recognised Consumer Association as per Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
In the case of Sobha Hibiscus Condominium vs. MW Sosha Developer’s Ltd. judgement dated February 2020, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that in essence voluntary consumer association will be a body formed by group of persons coming together, of their own will and without any pressure or influence from anyone and without being mandated by any other provisions of law.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(ii) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(iii)3 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(iii)What is the Manner of filing Complaint to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
Section 35 Consumer Protection Act 2019 provides that provides that a complaint, in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or any service provided or agreed to be provided, may be filed with a District commission by
(a)the consumer: -
(vii)to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service is provided or agreed to be provided; or
(viii)who alleges unfair trade practice in respect of such goods or service.
(b)any recognised consumer association, whether the consumer to whom such goods are sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered or such service is provided or agreed to be provided, or who alleges unfair trade practice in respect of such goods or service, is a member of such association or not,
(c)one or more consumers, where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Commission, on behalf of or for the benefit of, all consumers so interested; or
(d)The Central Government, the Central Authority or the State Government, as the case may be.
It may be noted that the complaint may be filed electronically in such manner as may be prescribed.
Every complaint filed under Section 35, sub-section (1) shall be accompanied with such fee and payable in such manner, including electronic form, as may be prescribed.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(iii) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(iv)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(iv)Can complaint be filed before Consumer Commission online ? Explain.
Yes, the complaint be filed before Consumer Commission online in the prescribed manner at http:// edaakhil.nic.in/.
A complaint:
•Should be in writing
•Can be filed in a regular way (offline)
•Can be filed online – http://edaakhil.nic.in/
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(iv) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2025Q. 1(iv)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
Swastik Ayurved Pharma Limited is one of the largest producers of Herbal and Ayurvedic products in India. To expand its market share, Swastik regularly advertised the claimed benefits of its products.
These advertisements promoted the products as having medicinal properties and the ability to cure ailments without side effects. However, the advertisements lacked any scientific evidence to support such claims. Relying upon these advertisements, Rajeev, a consumer, purchased the products. The products, however, turned out to be ineffective and did not match the claims made in the advertisements.
Rajeev, the complainant, lodged a complaint with the Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of India, alleging that the advertisements released by the company were misleading, false, and deceptive, intended to misguide the general public, and in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Further, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) also found the advertisements to be misleading and in violation of its regulations. It was contended that the company and its directors should be held liable for such misleading and deceptive advertisements. The case was ultimately referred to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by way of a special leave to appeal.
From the above case study, answer the following questions as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(iv)When and to whom a case may be lodged against and be appealed against such order ?
Any consumer who is aggrieved by the order of a commission can prefer an appeal in the higher commission within prescribed period from the date of the order. The appeal can be preferred-
•Against order of the District Commission before the State Commission within 45 days
•Against order of the State Commission before the National Commission within 30 days
•Against order of the National Commission before the Supreme Court within 30 days.
(2 Marks)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2025, Q. 1(iv) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(v)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(v)To whom an Appeal can be filed by Shardha Heights against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and what is limitation period for doing so ?
According to Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 any person aggrieved by an order made by the District Commission may prefer an appeal against such order to the State Commission on the grounds of facts or law within a period of forty-five days from the date of the order, in such form and manner, as may be prescribed. It may be noted that the State Commission may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of forty-five days, if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within that period.
Shradha Heights may appeal to the State Commission.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(v) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2024Q. 1(vi)2 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
“Shardha Heights,” a duly registered welfare society, took the proactive step of filing an application with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The application was on behalf of 12 allottees who had encountered significant issues with Shobha Ltd. a real estate developer.
These allottees alleged that despite booking units with Shobha Ltd. on various dates and making substantial payments towards the purchase, they had yet to receive possession of their properties.
However, the District Commission took a decisive stance, rejecting the complaint lodged by Shardha Heights. Their decision rested on the assertion that Shardha Heights lacked the necessary legal standing, or locus standi, to file such a complaint. ‘The Commission reasoned that Shardha Heights did not qualify as either a ‘Consumer‘ or a ‘Recognised’ consumer association’ under the applicable regulations. In light of this setback, Shardha Heights is now seeking to appeal against the District Commission’s ruling.
Considering the above statements, answer the following questions :
(vi)What are the restrictions on filing an appeal against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ?
There are certain restrictions on filling an appeal against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, unless the person fulfils the following conditions namely-
•No appeal by a person, who is required to pay any amount in terms of an order of the District Commission, shall be entertained by the State Commission unless the appellant has deposited fifty per cent. of that amount in the manner as may be prescribed.
•No appeal shall lie from any order passed under sub-section (1) of section 81 by the District Commission pursuant to a settlement by mediation under section 80.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2024, Q. 1(vi) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2026Q. 4A(iii)5 marksSyllabus 2022OR, alternative to Q. 4Law changed
Law changed after this attempt: The answer gives the National Commission jurisdiction as complaints where the consideration paid exceeds 10 crore rupees (S.58), noting only that the Central Government may prescribe another value. The supplements from December 2023 onward (supp_2024-06, supp_2024-12, supp_2025-06, supp_2025-12) record the Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules, 2021 of 30 December 2021, which prescribe the effective limits: District Commission up to 50 lakh, State Commission above 50 lakh up to 2 crore, National Commission above 2 crore rupees. A student would be misled on the operative threshold. The answer below reflects the law as it stood for June 2026.
(iii)Discuss the jurisdiction of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission under Section 58 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Section 58(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provides that subject to the other provisions of this Act, the National Commission shall have jurisdiction –
(a)to entertain –
(i)Complaints where the value of the goods or services paid as consideration exceeds rupees ten crore. Further, where the Central Government deems it necessary so to do, it may prescribe such other value, as it deems fit;
(ii)Complaints against unfair contracts, where the value of goods or services paid as consideration exceeds ten crore rupees;
(iii)Appeals against the orders of any State Commission;
(iv)Appeals against the orders of the Central Authority; and
(b)to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any State Commission where it appears to the National Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
According to Section 58(2), the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the National Commission may be exercised by Benches thereof and a Bench may be constituted by the President with one or more members as he may deem fit. The senior-most member of the Bench shall preside over the Bench.
Section 58(3) states that where the members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the points shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority, if there is a majority, but if the members are equally divided, they shall state the point or points on which they differ, and make a reference to the President who shall either hear the point or points himself or refer the case for hearing on such point or points by one or more of the other members and such point or points shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members who have heard the case, including those who first heard it. The President or the other member, as the case may be, shall give opinion on the point or points so referred within a period of two months from the date of such reference.
PART-II
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2026, Q. 4A(iii) (Syllabus 2022).
December 2023Q. 1(iii)5 marksSyllabus 2022
Tiya purchases a laptop for her sister Siya from HP. The laptop had initial installation issues, when taken to the manufacturer’s service centre defect in the laptop was detected. The company refuses to redress the issues faced by Siya on the pretext that she was not the consumer. On the basis of the above case, answer the following questions :
(iii)Had a mediator been appointed to settle the issue, what is the procedure of mediation as given in provision.
Section 79 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 states that the mediation shall be held in the consumer mediation cell attached to the District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission as the case may be.
Where a consumer dispute is referred for mediation by the district commission or the State commission or the National commission, as the case may be, the mediator nominated by such commission shall have regard to the rights and obligations of the parties, the usage of trade, if any, the circumstances giving rise to the consumer dispute and such other relevant factors, as he may deem necessary and shall be guided by the principle of natural justice while carrying out mediation.
The mediator so nominated shall conduct mediation within such time and in such manner as may be specified by regulations.
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, December 2023, Q. 1(iii) (Syllabus 2022).
June 2025Q. 1(iii)3 marksSyllabus 2022
Show the facts common to all parts of Q. 1
Swastik Ayurved Pharma Limited is one of the largest producers of Herbal and Ayurvedic products in India. To expand its market share, Swastik regularly advertised the claimed benefits of its products.
These advertisements promoted the products as having medicinal properties and the ability to cure ailments without side effects. However, the advertisements lacked any scientific evidence to support such claims. Relying upon these advertisements, Rajeev, a consumer, purchased the products. The products, however, turned out to be ineffective and did not match the claims made in the advertisements.
Rajeev, the complainant, lodged a complaint with the Secretary, Ministry of Health, Government of India, alleging that the advertisements released by the company were misleading, false, and deceptive, intended to misguide the general public, and in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which mandates that advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Further, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) also found the advertisements to be misleading and in violation of its regulations. It was contended that the company and its directors should be held liable for such misleading and deceptive advertisements. The case was ultimately referred to the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by way of a special leave to appeal.
From the above case study, answer the following questions as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :
(iii)Can the producer and its directors be penalized for issuing false or misleading advertisements under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
Section 89 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 states that any manufacturer or service provider who causes a false or misleading advertisement to be made which is prejudicial to the interest of consumers shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees; and for every subsequent offence, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to fifty lakh rupees. Hence the company and its corporate heads are liable accordingly.
(3 Marks)
Source: ICSI Guideline Answers, June 2025, Q. 1(iii) (Syllabus 2022).