Mr Iyer bought a mobile phone from a shop. The shopkeeper told him that it was an original phone of a well-known brand. The phone worked properly, but the brand’s service centre later found that it was a fake copy sold as an original. Mr Iyer died before he could file a complaint.
Which of the following correctly describes the phone and a person who can file a complaint about it under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019?
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 2
The correct answer is Option (2) → Spurious goods; his son, as his legal heir
Option (1) Defect in goods; his son, as his legal heir — Incorrect. A defect is a fault in the quality or manner of performance of goods. The phone worked properly, so it had no defect. The son as legal heir is right, but the phone is described wrongly.
Option (2) Spurious goods; his son, as his legal heir — Correct. Spurious goods are goods falsely claimed to be genuine. The shopkeeper sold a fake copy as an original, so the phone is spurious. After Mr Iyer’s death, his son can complain as his legal heir.
Option (3) Spurious goods; the company whose brand was copied — Incorrect. The phone is spurious, but the brand company is not a complainant under the Act. It did not buy the phone, so it is not a consumer here.
Option (4) Defect in goods; the company whose brand was copied — Incorrect. Both parts are wrong: the phone had no defect, and the brand company cannot complain.
NCERT (2026-27 Edition): “Terms & Definitions … 2. Complainant: means one or more consumers, or any voluntary consumer association, central or state government or the central authority or a legal heir or legal representative or a parent or legal representative in case of a minor. |