POCSO Act | Foundational Facts Establishing Offence Must Be Proved To Trigger Statutory Presumption Under Section 29: Calcutta High Court Expectation Of Higher Price In Future Auctions No Ground To Discard Highest Bid Above Reserve Price; Subsequent Sale Hit By Section 52 TP Act: Allahabad High Court AI May Well Serve As Training Wheels But Entrusting It With Pilot's Seat Would Be Both Imprudent And Dangerous: Bombay High Court Appeal Against Acquittal Under Section 138 NI Act Can Be Dismissed For Non-Prosecution If Complainant Fails To Serve Notice On Accused: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejection Of Section 348 BNSS Witness Recall Plea Is Interlocutory; Inherent Powers Cannot Provide Backdoor Entry Where Section 438(2) Revisional Bar Applies Absent Gross Injustice: Delhi High Court Limitation Period For Appeal Commences From Date Assessee Receives Copy Of ITAT Order, Not Date Of Pronouncement: Bombay High Court Under Section 254(3) Income Tax Act Section 82 CrPC | Failure To Attempt Service At Known Overseas Address Vitiates Proclamation; Setting Aside PO Declaration Does Not Invalidate Arrest Warrants Or Extradition: Delhi High Court Expenditure Incurred By Defaulting Party Cannot Be Equated With Benefit Received Under Section 64 Contract Act: Karnataka High Court Upholds Setting Aside Of Arbitral Award Under Section 34 A&C Act Vendor Executing Agreement To Sell Pendente Lite Precluded From Compromising Appeal Prejudicially; Intending Purchasers Entitled To Impleadment Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala Rent Act | Examination Of Co-Landlord Spouse Sufficient To Prove Bona Fide Need Even If Spouse Intending To Occupy Doesn't Testify: High Court Personal Accident Coverage Under Motor Insurance Policy Does Not Extend To Borrower; Exonerates Insurer From Liability: Madras High Court Limitation To Challenge Void Sale Deed Runs From Discovery Of Fraud, Unilateral Material Alteration Vitiates Title: Orissa High Court Interim Status Quo Order Automatically Lapses Upon Dismissal Of Suit, Pendency Of First Appeal Does Not Entitle Injunction Under Order 39 CPC: Punjab & Haryana High Court District Caste Verification Committee Has No Jurisdiction Under Section 4C Karnataka SC/ST Act To Cancel Caste Certificate On Private Third-Party Complaint Absent Validation Request: Karnataka High Court Joint Title Presumes Equal Share Unless Exclusive Consideration Proved By Documented Evidence: Kerala High Court POCSO Act | Delay In Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witnesses Does Not Weaken Sterling Testimony Of Victim: Madras High Court Mandatory Affixation Of Welfare Fund Stamp On Vakalatnama Valid Under List III Entries 23 & 26, Not A Toll On Right To Practice: Telangana High Court Upholds Sections 12 & 12A Of Advocates Welfare Fund Act BSF Personnel Certified Medically Incapacitated Entitled To Disability Pension Despite 'Voluntary Retirement' Label Under Rule 48-A CCS Rules: Punjab & Haryana High Court SARFAESI Auction Purchaser Takes Title Free From Subsequent Attachments, Claim Enquiry Confined Only To Property Rights: Kerala High Court Commercial Use, Late-Night Events In Areas Adjacent To Reserved Forest Prohibited To Protect Wildlife Under Forest Conservation Norms: Rajasthan High Court In Composite Negligence, Claimants Free To Recover Entire Compensation From Any Joint Tortfeasor Without Impleading Other Vehicle: Orissa High Court Regular Magistrate Lacks Jurisdiction Under Section 190 CrPC To Take Cognizance Against Sitting Or Former Legislators; Special MP/MLA Court Alone Competent: Karnataka High Court Specific Performance Cannot Be Decreed On Fabricated Sale Agreement Bearing Sequential Stamp Papers From Decade-Old Mortgage; Section 340 CrPC Applicable: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sole Testimony Of Child Victim Stands On Same Footing As Injured Witness, Defective Investigation No Ground To Discard Credible Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction U/S 6 POCSO Act, 376 IPC Once Trial Court Accepts Written Statement Without Objection, It Cannot Recall Order To Strike Off Defence Under Order 8 Rule 1: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Court Fee Refund Under Section 69 Or Section 69-A Of Tamil Nadu Court Fees Act If Out-Of-Court Settlement Is Reached After Trial Commences: Madras High Court

Right to Repair-Mandatory for Manufacturers to offer repair services for smartphones, consumer durables and automobile products

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


The government will mandate that manufacturers of automobiles, cell phones, and other consumer goods share product information so that consumers can perform repairs themselves or hire third parties.

In a statement released on Thursday, the Department of Consumer Affairs announced the formation of a committee chaired by Nidhi Khare, an additional secretary, to develop a framework for "Right to Repair." Wednesday was the first time the committee met to identify sectors for the right.

The sectors identified include farming equipment, mobile phones/ tablets, consumer durables, and automobiles/automobile equipment. According to the concept of 'Right to Repair,' customers must possess a product in its entirety after purchase. "...consumers should be able to easily and affordably repair and modify their products without being subject to the whims of manufacturers," according to the statement.

The framework aims to empower consumers, standardise trade between original equipment manufacturers and third-party buyers and sellers, and reduce e-waste, according to the statement.

The rationale behind the 'Right to Repair' is that when customers purchase a product, it is inherent that they must own it in its entirety. Therefore, consumers should be able to repair and modify the product without being subject to the whims of manufacturers.

Nevertheless, manufacturers typically retain proprietary control over spare parts, including their design, and the government believes that this type of monopoly on repair processes violates the "right to choose" of the customer.

"Manufactures promote a culture of "planned obsolescence." This is a system in which the design of any device is such that it only lasts for a certain amount of time, after which it must be replaced. When contracts fail to transfer complete control to the buyer, the legal rights of the seller are compromised "The committee stated in its initial meeting.

LocalCircles, a community network, discovered in a previous survey that 43% of Indian households have three or more devices or gadgets that are less than five years old and require service or repair.

The right to repair has been recognised in many nations around the world, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.

In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission has instructed manufacturers to end unfair anticompetitive practises and to ensure that consumers can perform repairs themselves or through a third party.

Latest Legal News