Supreme Court Upholds Consumer Protection Act's Pecuniary Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court backed the pecuniary jurisdiction clauses of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, asserting their constitutionality under Article 14. It assured that consumer remedies remain intact, and jurisdiction is efficiently apportioned based on monetary values paid for goods and services.

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of key provisions in the Consumer Protection Act of 2019, which define the pecuniary jurisdictions of consumer redressal commissions at district, state, and national levels based on the monetary value of the goods and services involved.

The court dismissed challenges to sections 34, 47, and 58 of the Act, affirming that these provisions are not in violation of Article 14 and upholding Parliament's legislative competence to enact the law. The decision clarifies that jurisdiction and power are appropriately tied to the value paid for products or services, ensuring effective consumer protection.

Despite claims suggesting a limitation on consumer remedies, the court emphasized that redressal options remain unaffected, and categorization based on financial value is necessary for establishing a structured hierarchy of judicial review. The ruling reinforces that compensation claims must align with the statutory pecuniary guidelines to determine their appropriate forum.

(With inputs from agencies.)