Hyderabad: Frivolous litigations galore at consumer panels; offenders to face music

Hyderabad: Instances of misuse of the Consumer Protection Act for personal gain have come to light in Hyderabad, with some individuals repeatedly filing cases in different consumer commissions seeking compensation.

Consumer Commissions have begun taking serious note of such practices and are imposing penalties to curb frivolous litigation.

Same case filed in multiple commissions

According to officials, certain complainants have been filing identical cases in different district commissions after their complaints were dismissed in one forum.

In some instances, appeals pending before the State Commission were ignored while re-filing cases by altering complainant names.

In a recent insurance claim rejection case, compensation was awarded by a commission. However, it later emerged that another complaint related to the same policy had been filed again with a different set of evidence.

The duplication raised serious concerns about abuse of the legal process.

Habitual litigant targets multiple forums

In another case, a private employee allegedly made a habit of filing multiple consumer complaints.

Taking advantage of orders directing that successful complainants be awarded not less than ₹10,000 towards compensation and litigation costs, he repeatedly approached different commissions.

Using photocopies of the same documents as evidence, he filed cases in three different consumer commissions in Hyderabad, naming different parties as respondents in each case.

The District Commission detected discrepancies between the name mentioned in the receipt and the respondents arrayed in the complaint and dismissed the case.

Undeterred, he reportedly filed the same complaint in another commission using the same receipt, where the duplication was identified again, exposing the attempt.

Penalty for wasting judicial time

Consumer Commissions have also begun imposing fines on complainants who frequently file baseless cases, thereby wasting valuable judicial time.

In one such instance, a complainant from Saidabad was fined ₹40,000 for repeatedly filing cases without substantiating evidence.

The individual had earlier filed complaints against Vijetha Supermarket over carry bag charges, Bharti Airtel over alleged SMS harassment, a television replacement issue related to a purchase made seven years ago, and service deficiency cases against MakeMyTrip and Qatar Airways.

As the complainant failed to produce credible evidence in support of the allegations, the Commission described him as a “habitual litigant” and imposed the penalty.

Warning against frivolous complaints

Officials said that while the Consumer Protection Act is meant to safeguard genuine consumers from exploitation, misuse of the system undermines its purpose and burdens the judicial mechanism.

Commissions have made it clear that strict action, including financial penalties, will be taken against those filing false or repetitive complaints for personal gain.