CCPA Order Directing Amazon to Recall Pressure Cookers Sold Without BIS Mark Kept in Abeyance by Delhi HC

Tanisha Rana

Published on: September 21, 2022 at 22:31 IST

On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court kept in abeyance an order passed by Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) requesting that Amazon recall household pressure cookers that allegedly did not adhere to the required requirements and compensate the customers.

Nevertheless, Justice Yashwant Varma also ordered Amazon to deposit the Rs. 1 lakh fine levied on it by the body and to alert users about the allegedly defective pressure cookers after hearing Amazon’s appeal of the CCPA judgement.

On November 16, when posting the case for hearing, the Court requested that CCPA submit its response to the plea.

Because e-commerce platforms permitted the selling of domestic pressure cookers that did not adhere to mandatory criteria, the CCPA had taken unilateral action against them.

Amazon, Flipkart, Paytm Mall, Shopclues, and Snapdeal, as well as the vendors registered on these platforms, had each received notices from the regulator in this regard.

The CCPA said in the contested ruling that a total of 2,265 pressure cookers sold on Amazon did not adhere to legal requirements.

The CCPA had ordered Amazon to notify all customers who had purchased pressure cookers through its platform, recall the pressure cookers, pay customers for their purchase costs, and also to submit a compliance report regarding the same.

Senior Attorney Rajiv Nayar, who is representing the e-commerce platform, mentioned the CCPA’s authority to send an issue for inquiry under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act during today’s session.

He explained that in order for the provision to be in effect, both the prima facie determination of a breach of a consumer’s rights and the requirement for a Director General or District Collector investigation must be met.

What is the investigation in this case? Even if it is seen from a narrow meaning….there has to be a report of investigation,” Nayar argued.

On the other hand, Attorney Apoorv Kurup representing CCPA stated that a report was created following an investigation by the authority’s investigative wing.

He continued by noting that statements from producers indicating that many of the products did not adhere to BIS requirements had been recorded even prior to conducting search and seizure operations.

“Investigation report is only confirming our apprehension that the products are not ISI mark. It is not adding anything more,” Kurup said.

Amazon stated yesterday that because there had been no investigation or inquiry, the CCPA could not have determined that the products were not in compliance with Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS).

Nayar had argued that the case had not been handled properly in accordance with Section 20 of the Consumer Protection Act.

According to Section 20, the CCPA may issue an order for the recall of goods or the withdrawal of services, the reimbursement of the prices of goods or services, or the cessation of practises that are unfair and detrimental to the interests of consumers if it determines after an investigation that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate a violation of consumer rights or unfair trade practises.

Rajiv Nayar, a senior attorney, represented Amazon, while Apoorv Kurup and Aparna Arun, attorneys, represented CCPA.

Case Title: Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Central Consumer Protection Authority

Related Post