Case 2:Trying to befool the BSNL and the district consumer forum, Surinder Singh, a resident of Sector 22, had allegedly converted the digit ‘1’ to ‘6’ on the receipt of his telephone bill. While he paid a bill of Rs 153 to the Chandigarh Telecom, his late fee payment of six months amounted to Rs 653. Alleging that he had paid the entire bill of Rs 653 and was still asked for payment, he moved the consumer forum for ‘compensation’, showing the tampered receipt as evidence.

Case 3:Neetika Singh, a resident of Sector 49, alleged that she had approached Dynamic Motors in Industrial Area for repair of her Optra car after she met with an accident. She alleged that the dealers told her that the claim of Rs 3.75 lakh would be paid by the insurance company and refused to repair the car. The forum, however, found that it was the complainant who had refused to pay an advance payment of Rs 1 lakh and also concealed the fact that she had filed another complaint with the insurance company asking to take possession of the car. Her plan was to allegedly get the repair done without paying any money.

Case 4:Sita Ram, a resident of Sector 15, moved the consumer forum after he purchased a Konica digital photocopier that did not function properly even after being replaced once. Since it was still within the warranty period, he sought its replacement and a compensation. The forum found that the warranty period was six months or 30,000 copies, and the complainant had already used the machine for 87,625 copies. The original service report was also found to be tampered with.

These are not isolated cases. Made to protect the rights of the consumer, the Consumer Protection Act is being misused by a lot of people who wish to make ‘quick money’ by filing false claims.

The UT Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-1, headed by Jagroop Singh Mahal, has seen many cases this year where the complainant has been asked to pay Rs 10,000 under Section 26 of the Act for filing a frivolous complaint.

Tampering of bills, asking the insurance company to pay even after the policy period has expired, threatening the dealers or shopkeepers, as the case may be, of moving the forum, making deliberate changes in payment receipts are some of the trends that are increasingly being witnessed at the consumer courts.

“It is unfortunate that the complainant has dragged the opposite party into a false and frivolous litigation unnecessarily. He has also wasted the precious time of the forum for which a sum of Rs 10,000 be imposed on him under Section 26 of the Consumer Protection Act,” a judge held in a recent case.