An Analytical Study Of E-Contracts: With Special Reference To E-Commerce
- IJLLR Journal
- Jun 13, 2022
- 19 min read
Manav Kirtikumar Thakkar, BBA LLB, Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad, Symbiosis International (Deemed University)
ABSTRACT
E-commerce has grown in popularity in recent decades as a result of the computer system's and information technology's rapid growth, as well as a surge in inventions related to online services. E-contracts are an important part of E-commerce. Customers' trust in e-commerce is rising by the day, now that e-contracts are legally recognised. E-commerce and E-contracts are growing in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. E-contracts are governed by several of the regulations in India. E-contracts are often validated using the standards of the Indian Contract Act of 1872[1], which are similar to normal contracts. Under the criteria of the Information Technology Act of 2000[2], e-contracts are legally recognised. The Indian Evidence Act of 1872[3] makes the E-contract enforceable. The purchasing and selling of data, goods, and service using computerised network communication is known as electronic commerce. It is, however, a much larger concept that includes not just electronic data transfer as well as other types of communication like electronic bulletin boards and e-mails. The use of e–contracts is increasing as e–commerce rises. However, the concept of an e-contract is still unclear; it faces a number of challenges. In Indian contract law, the common contractual rule is formally recognised. This research examines the legality of e-commerce and e-contracts in India, which are controlled and protected by distinct Acts and laws. It goes through the key factors and their significance in long-term sustainability. Online businesses and online contracts are becoming an increasingly significant element of almost everyone's life. These concepts are applicable to a larger spectrum of businesses that rely only on the internet. This research also shows how the Indian legal system has tried to enhance the status of e-contracts and e-commerce. They have helped to enhance the regulations and the system.
The word "e-commerce" was coined in the 1960s to reflect the rise of e- commerce, which is defined as the buying and selling of things through information transmission, as occurred with the advent of electronic data interchange. Over the last fifty years, e-commerce has revolutionised the way society sells goods and services. Different organisational charters are required for new company models. E-contracting is part of e-business. This business model allows companies to save time on product development and make items that are suited to each customer's needs, measure sales, and receive rapid feedback from customers. The introduction of new technologies such as the internet and other networks revolutionised the corporate environment and improved the efficiency of e-business trade activities. Since the processes for completing and constructing an e-contract are distinct and may appear to be more advanced than traditional contracts, technology improvement has resulted in speedier ways of performing commercial transactions in comparison to paper transactions. E-commerce (Electronic-Commerce) has quickly become the most popular and commonly utilised business model. Online commercial transactions and the virtual selling and purchase of goods and services are referred to as e-commerce. The E-commerce business has benefited over the previous decades due to the rise and extraordinary development of the computer system and information technology, as well as the increase in technologies related to internet services (5G). E-commerce is gaining appeal among today's technologically sophisticated and time-pressed populace since it is the most efficient, widespread, and conveniently accessible or executable sort of organisation. E-contracts (Electronic-Contracts) are a vital part of Ecommerce. E-commerce has given commercial operations a new dimension that is no longer limited by geographical borders or the requirement of physical presence in the same area. E-commerce activities have become a vital part of Internet users' daily lives during the last 10 years. As a result of e-commerce, e-contracts have become mainstream, and the number of Internet users engaged in E-contracts is fast expanding. Contracts have become so common in everyday life that we are often unaware we have engaged into one. Contracts govern many areas of our daily lives, from renting a cab to buying airline tickets online. Customers' trust in e-commerce is rising by the day since e-contracts are legally recognised. In addition to the previously mentioned E-commerce developments, the COVID-19 pandemic situation, particularly during the lockdown period, forces some consumers who were previously unaware and unwilling to enter E-commerce and, eventually, the E-contract due to a lack of trust in online transactions, to enter the E-contract. This circumstance encourages the growth of E-commerce and E-contracts. Even when the unlock period begins, most consumers increasingly rely on E-commerce and E-contracts to obtain their basic requirements, as trust in E-contracts grows. E-contracts are also utilised by business communities to conduct commercial transactions since they are the most efficient and trustworthy way to conduct business these days. As a result, E-commerce and E-contracts are becoming increasingly important. The digital era has given rise to a plethora of new business opportunities. Common commercial transactions may be completed with the press of a mouse, and agreements can be drafted and executed wholly online. However, the technological developments that have transformed modern commerce have also raised unique legal difficulties, notably concerning the form and enforceability of contracts established and carried out electronically. Websites may risk legal responsibility and other negative repercussions for a variety of regular digital commerce operations. In this study, the researcher looks at the huge changes that have happened in the way customers purchase products and services, apart from the increasing complexity of today's services and goods. Customers may purchase things on the internet using e-commerce. The consumer has no means of knowing whether or not the person with whom he or she is speaking online is genuine in such a transaction, making them more vulnerable to being duped out of their earnings by swindlers. Customers are frequently subjected to unfavourable terms in the form of exemptions provisions aimed at minimising or reducing the trader's obligation, such as faulty goods, for which they would otherwise be accountable. Since most pre-packaged items cannot be thoroughly inspected before purchasing, the caveat emptor principle (let the buyer beware) no longer applies in practise. It is also vital for the government to have the legal authority to protect the people from unfair terms in consumer contracts as well as other unethical markets by manufacturers or merchants seeking to make enormous profits at the cost of naïve customers. As a result, existing law is required to handle such challenges. It is also inevitable that conflicts would develop in distant contracts since such deals are concluded by electronic methods, which seem to be inefficient owing to shortcomings, as well as the subject of legality and jurisdictions tends to arise because either party will try to uphold the law that will provide them with the most redress.
An online contract, sometimes known as an electronic contract, is one that is formed, signed, and executed electronically, typically through the internet. A standard paper-based contract is logically and practically equal to an online contract, and it is drafted in the same manner. In the case of an online contract, the seller will market their products, pricing, and purchasing terms to prospective buyers. Prospective buyers can then think about it or click 'Click to Agree' or the 'I Agree' button to signify their approval of the seller's terms, or they can sign electronically. With the fast growth of information technology, conducting economic transactions via E-contracts is becoming increasingly straightforward. It is feasible for the parties to enter into such a contract rapidly by exchanging electronic communication of offer and acceptance. E-contracts are an important part of E-commerce. E-contracts are used to sell and deliver goods and services to the addressee through the internet. The definition of an e-contract is the same as that of a traditional contract: "contract as an agreement enforceable by law." The key distinction is that it is done out via online conversation rather than the parties meeting in person. "A contract can be produced by exchanging data messages," according to the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce, and "where a data message is used in the construction of a contract, its validity shall not be denied." Under present regulations, both computer and paper-based communication are authorised. Entering the signer's name into the signature box, copying and pasting the scanned form of the signature, or selecting a specific option are all ways to get an electronic signature. Once the terms have been approved and the money has been received, the transaction can be completed. Communication takes place largely between two computers through the use of servers. The online contract is intended to help individuals negotiate and enforce commercial contract norms inside internet-based businesses. Individuals and business partners may use the Online Contract application to buy, sell, and receive items and services.
The use of the internet in modern business transactions has posed a significant challenge to goods sale legislation. Consumers can acquire commodities using electronic transactions that are agreed upon, settled, and sent across an open network. As a result, a variety of consumer-related issues must be addressed, including:
Another difficulty that arises with electronic contracts is the consumer's right to cancel a product after a party has bought it. Since the consumer does not feel or touch the product, the client may be unsatisfied when it arrives. It's possible that the consumer finds it enticing when he sees it on the screen, but when he holds it, the product's appearance may not be as tempting as it appeared on the screen. Because the consumer does not have the ability to inspect the items in an electronic contract, there must be a sufficient cooling-off period that provides the consumer a reasonable amount of time to cancel the goods and return them to the trader. On the dotted line, the court also stated that there would be no possibility for a weaker side to negotiate in order to claim equal bargaining power. He must accept or reject the service or goods in accordance with the dotted line contract. His alternatives would be to accept the unreasonable or unfair terms or to permanently cancel the service. It should also be mentioned that if the things are cancelled, the trader's return to the client may take an inordinate length of time, which may be unjust to the consumer because his money is locked for a certain period of time. As a result, the law demands that return times be rigorously followed, otherwise the online merchant may be penalised.
Technology has significantly expanded the capacity of internet corporations to gather and analyse massive quantities of data about customers who just visit their websites, raising worries about how this data is utilised. Many organisations throughout the world routinely gather a range of information about their consumers in order to better understand their clientele, optimise corporate operations, and target special offers. Prior to the internet, businesses tracked individual transactions, but now there is more to consider, since a firm may also record pages of websites that pique the attention of clients. Many firms, for example, require their customers to register with them via their websites by inputting personal information. Some websites, however, refuse to provide their services to those who do not register, and customers who register may mistakenly believe that the information they enter would only be used by the company for the current transaction. In actuality, the firm may sell or otherwise exploit the information to third parties. Customers are also concerned about "identity theft," which occurs when a criminal obtains access to a consumer's personal information, allowing him to impersonate the consumer and begin purchasing whatever items and services are to be billed to the consumer. In addition, the usage of credit cards, debit cards, and smart cards may result in the recording, tracking, and selling of users' purchasing and banking activities. The growing collecting and usage of data has raised public awareness and consumer concerns about internet privacy.
Additional issue that arises with e - contracts is deciding who would take responsibility in the case of a disagreement, such as faulty product delivery, late delivery, and so on. Can a case be brought against websites like Flipkart, Snapdeal, and others when goods and services are purchased from them and a dispute arises because they are more involved with building and handling a digital platform that allows merchants who stock storage systems to sell things for a commission through it rather than with the acquisition or selling of products and services. Under a business contract, both options are advantageous to the innocent party, as proven by the famous judgement of ESSO Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Mardon[4]. However, in the case of an electronic contract, the consumer finds the fraud only after receiving the goods or services. To put the deal on hold, the customer must demonstrate that the misrepresentation induced him to participate into the transaction. Furthermore, returning the items and recovering the benefits would be inconvenient for the customer. Similarly, the manufacturer or supplier of goods and services may assert that they entered into a contract with the online portal for the sale of the product or services and were not in dispute with the consumer. As a result, the section defining their duties must be included into a separate legislation so that the consumer can sue either the online portal or the manufacturer, or both. This saves the customer the burden of deciding who to sue and securing restitution from both parties. The terms and conditions provided in the electronic contract are typically arbitrary, and the consumer, being a layperson, fails to pay attention and enters into the transaction.
Another issue with electronic contracts is the client receiving damaged goods in exchange for entirely erroneous ones. www.Shopclues.com was sent with a legal notice for selling counterfeit JBL speakers. Harman International (India) Pvt. Ltd. is a manufacturer of high-end audio equipment. A recent example was a consumer who claimed to have ordered a laptop but received a brick instead. A chocolate bar was used in place of a Samsung Galaxy Core 2, stones in place of an iPhone 4S, a Rs. 600 heater in place of a MacBook Pro, and a bar of soap in place of a smartphone for a man who demanded one. Several Indian customers have complained about receiving nasty shocks at their door. Another issue came on October 6, 2014, when Flipkart announced the Big Billion Sale, claiming to have sold Rs 600 crore ($100 million). While the frenzied purchasing suggests that India's e-commerce is maturing, Big Billion Day also revealed e-commerce concerns in India, which were discussed on social media channels. Users complained about anything from operational issues including out-of-stock products to claims that Flipkart raised prices before lowering them. To prevent such heinous acts, legislation must be enacted that provides enough recompense to victims as well as a deterrent effect on online dealers, preventing them from engaging in such practises.
The IT Act includes several legislation that govern e-commerce businesses. The Central Government is required by Section 84A of the IT Act[6] to encourage e-governance and e-commerce. It must also include provisions for the safe use of electronic methods. Section 43A of the IT Act[7] includes requirements for data protection. Identity theft is punishable under Section 66A of the IT Act,[8] which stipulates that anybody who dishonestly uses another person's password or identity shall face imprisonment for up to two years or a fine of INR one lakh/-, or both. The Information Technology Act[9] (Reasonable security practises and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011, apply to e-commerce firms. The Intermediary Rules 2011[10] will govern intermediary websites and the content they display under the IT Act. On February 25, 2021, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) notified the Information Technology (Guidelines for Intermediaries and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021[11] in cooperation with the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The Rules were published in accordance with the government's rule-making authority under Section 87 of the IT Act,[12] which governs intermediary norms and content blocking. The Rules require intermediaries, among other things, to publish their rules and regulations, privacy policy, and user agreement on their websites/applications and to notify users of the same on a regular basis, prohibit intermediaries from hosting, storing, publishing, and so on, and prescribe an information retention period.
· Consumer Protection Act, 2019[13] and Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020
The Consumer Protection Act of 2019[14] and the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules of 2020 have been released by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food, and Public Distribution. The Consumer Protection Act of 2019[15] modifies the Consumer Protection Act of 1986[16] to address the unique difficulties that have arisen in this age of digitalization and e-commerce. The E-Commerce Rules create a framework for regulating online product and service advertising, sale, and purchasing. The following topics are addressed by the E-Commerce Rules.:
1. all products and services transferred through an electronic/digital network (including digital objects);
2. all kinds of e-commerce, including marketplace and inventory models;
3. all e-commerce retail formats, including marketplaces and inventories and all forms of unfair trade practices across all e-commerce models.
If any of the following prerequisites are satisfied, the E-Commerce Rules apply to e-commerce organisations but not to natural individuals:
1. The activities are carried out on a personal basis; and
2. The acts do not constitute any professional or commercial activity that is carried out on a regular or systematic basis. Simply put, the E-Commerce Rules do not apply if a person engages in a transaction in a personal capacity rather than on a regular or systematic basis for any professional or commercial activity. As a result, natural people who engage in sporadic consumer-to-consumer or business-to-consumer transactions may be barred.
Furthermore, the E-Commerce Rules apply extraterritorially to non-Indian e-commerce enterprises that provide items and services to Indian consumers. A proposed update to the E-Commerce Rules envisioned by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs would widen the reach as well as the list of dos and don'ts for e-commerce enterprises; however, it is unclear where this amendment is headed. The highlights of the Draft Amendment are as follows:
1. The E-Commerce Rules, on the other hand, only applicable to e-commerce businesses that owned/operated/managed e-commerce platforms, the Draft Amendment broadens the definition of a "e-commerce entity" to include related parties as well as any entity engaged by the e-commerce entity to fulfil orders placed by its users.
2. E-commerce companies must register with the Department of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) and display their registration numbers prominently on their platforms and invoices;
3. False ads cannot be promoted or shown in the usual course of business or for any other similar purpose.
4. One of the changes to the e-commerce entity's grievance redress mechanism is the appointment of a "Chief Compliance Officer," who would be managerial personnel or a senior employee of the e-commerce entity and would be liable for any proceedings relating to third-party information, data, or communication links provided by the e-commerce entity;
5. Appointment of a nodal contact person (not the Chief Compliance Officer) who is an Indian citizen and lives in India for continual connection with law enforcement authorities and citizens regarding order and request compliance;
6. Cross-selling and flash sales are not permitted.
FDI in E-Commerce Entities/Platforms is currently managed by the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-Debt Instruments) Rules, 2019. An e-commerce business, according to the aforementioned criteria, is a corporation incorporated under the Companies Act of 1956 or the Companies Act of 2013.[17]
The Legal Metrology Act defines a "e-commerce entity" as a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956[19] or the Companies Act, 2013[20], a foreign company covered by Section 2(42) of the Companies Act, 2013[21], or an office, branch, or agency in India owned or controlled by a person resident outside India and engaged in e-commerce business.
The Legal Metrology Act defines a "e-commerce entity" as a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 or the Companies Act, 2013, a foreign company covered by Section 2(42) of the Companies Act, 2013[22], or an office, branch, or agency in India owned or controlled by a person residing outside India that engages in e-commerce business. While inaccurate information displayed on a marketplace model e-commerce portal will be held accountable and punished under the Legal Metrology Act and regulations, the e-commerce institution will be held liable and penalised for failing to make required declarations as required by the Legal Metrology and laws.
The Sale of Goods Act of 1930 [24]dictates what information must be included in a company's sales and shipping policies. To manage the sale of commodities, terms such as guarantees, conditions, and the transfer of property in objects are also mentioned. Furthermore, the policy must specify whether or not return/refund options are available.
E-contracts are generated in e-commerce transactions, which are essentially standard form agreements controlled by the Indian Contract Act of 1872[26]. As a result, in order for e-commerce contracts to be legally binding-
1. Agreed into with the voluntary assent of the contract's parties; and
2. In the contract, there must be a legal consideration. The Contract Act regulates the legality of electronic contracts, offer transmission and acceptance, as well as the cancellation and formation of contracts between customers, sellers, and intermediaries. Furthermore, any online platform's terms of service, privacy policies, and return policies must all be legally enforceable agreements. The 2008 Information Technology Act[27] contains provisions for the drafting of electronic contracts. Electronic contracts are governed by Section 10A of the Information Technology Act of 2000[28]. It indicates that merely because a proposal is received and accepted electronically, as well as its rejection and acceptance, the contract will not be deemed invalid or unenforceable.
According to the 2002 Competition Act, Similarly, the manufacturer or supplier of goods and services may assert that they entered into a contract with the online portal for the sale of the product or services and were not in dispute with the consumer. As a result, the section defining their duties must be included into a separate legislation so that the consumer can sue either the online portal or the manufacturer, or both. This saves the customer the burden of deciding who to sue and securing restitution from both parties. Several e-commerce ecosystem components are expected to be influenced by competition challenges. Predatory online platforms include exclusive agreements between online retailers and sellers, significant discounts on predatory online platforms, platform neutrality and parity contracts, and platform parity rules. Section 3's anti-competitive agreements restrictions and Section 4's abuse of dominant position provisions apply to e-commerce platforms.
The impact of information and communication technology on society, namely corporate houses and customers, has been profound. With the introduction of e-commerce exchanges, technology has also redefined corporate transactions. In today's world, computer use and e-commerce via the Internet have raised the standard for worldwide corporate transactions. Individual consumers, businesses, governments, and international organisations have been drawn to the impact of new technological advancements and massive e-commerce transaction convergence not only to facilitate business venture growth, but also to pose a variety of challenges and confrontations to various social and individual interests, such as data protection, consumer protection, and privacy violations. As a result of the e-commerce dilemma, the significance of building a regulatory framework to address e-commerce challenges while protecting consumer rights has been stressed. As a result of the new phenomena of e-commerce, a safe and adequate system for completing e-commerce transactions and satisfying consumer protection criteria is necessary.
The seriousness of e-commerce regulations has not been as accurate as its expansion during the past decade. The Information Technology Act, which is seen as the consumer's guardian in the realm of e-commerce or any online transaction, has extremely limited jurisdiction. The word privacy, which limits the breach solely to the extent that a photograph of a person is captured in a situation that may lawfully be considered an infringement for up to three years, is a brilliant example of the Act's confinement. Furthermore, when it comes to the scenario in which items and services offered through online transactions are insufficient or inadequate, the Act is quiet on the question of e-commerce. There have been reports of customers ordering mobile phones only to receive soap instead. The Flipkart Big Sale, which made news due to its failure due to the proprietor unexpectedly raising the cost of items that were supposed to be at an all-time low, is the most recent example of customer exploitation. All of these incidents highlight the fragile character of the legislation that governs these businesses and highlight the need for a system that may make e-commerce more accountable to customers, the violation of which can result in harsh action or litigation against them. Even if the proposed Consumer Protection Bill amends the Consumer Protection Act, a gap in the legislation covering precisely "e-commerce" would undoubtedly persist. The new legislation may embrace the concept of e-commerce, but Indian legislators must recognise that in this moment of greater attraction to the online world, the advantages it gives must be enabled and the negatives minimised. E-commerce is such a wide concept that merely include it in consumer protection regulations would be insufficient. The only solution to address the aforementioned problem is to enact separate regulations for electronic contracts. When we compare India to other countries in terms of e-commerce legislation, we see that India trails far behind in bringing customers to justice; there are several loopholes that contribute to the breakdown of an efficient legal system, such as the lack of a separate statute dealing with e-commerce. An independent study was recently performed by IIM Ahmedabad, which examined the proposed modifications and advised that e-commerce legislation be implemented separately, as is the practise in other countries. It was revealed that there is a significant difference in the nature of online and physical transactions. A specialised law for e-commerce would provide consumers with more real protection, especially because electronic contracts are here to stay.
For more than a decade, consumer protection in the context of e-commerce has been a topic of discussion in India, but no specific solution has yet been adopted into the Indian economic environment. The existing laws are insufficient to guarantee consumer rights, prompting the development of new legislation to safeguard the interests of all parties concerned. Furthermore, in today's economic context, clients are unaware of their rights, making exploitation simpler. As a result, the new legislation should be implemented in such a way that it protects consumer rights while taking into account all of the essential features of disputes that may emerge in the marketplace involving electronic transactions.
Limitations and conditions on the supplier's use of certain forms of distance communication in e-commerce transactions, such as prohibitions on "cold calling," which involves contacting a consumer without his consent, and complaints and redressal procedures and mechanisms for resolving disputes between a consumer and a supplier in e-commerce transactions, may be suitably amended/modified to make it more consumer friendly. Finally, a fair, strong, competitive, increasing, and developed market may be formed by safeguarding customers from unfair trade practises and allowing them to participate in the success of the e-commerce firm. As previously indicated, proper consumer legal protection would result in a new generation of consumer rights as well as a developed market for customer-backed firms. As a result, incorporating the aforementioned patron protection principles into prison regulatory mechanisms for strengthening patron rights in e-commerce transactions will now not most effective make certain the safety of fundamental patron rights in e-trade transactions, however it will also speed up the e-commerce marketplace's increase. More specifically, it is suggested that a particular and adequate set of well-defined and well-addressed legislative framework be formed in order to promote consumer safety in e-commerce transactions while preserving a degree of trust and confidence in e-commerce. This will make it simpler for society, particularly customers, to comprehend and relate to effective consumer protection regulations, which will be recognised and understood in terms of consumer protection and the expansion of e-commerce.
[1] Indian Contract Act, 1872, No. 9, Imperial Legislative Council, 1872 (India) [2] Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [3]Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Imperial Legislative Council, 1872 (India) [4] ESSO Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Mardon (1976) ALL ELR 5 [5] Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [6] Information Technology Act, 2000, §84 A, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [7] Information Technology Act, 2000, §43 A, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [8] Information Technology Act, 2000, §66 A, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [9] Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [10] Intermediary Rules, 2011, §79, The Department of Electronics and Information Technology, 2011 (India) [11] Intermediary Rules, 2021, The Department of Electronics and Information Technology, 2021 (India) [12] Information Technology Act, 2000, §87 A, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [13] The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, No. 144, Parliament of India, 2019 (India) [14] The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, No. 144, Parliament of India, 2019 (India) [15] The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, No. 144, Parliament of India, 2019 (India) [16] The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, No. 144, Parliament of India, 1986 (India) [17] Companies Act, 2013, No. 121-C, Parliament of India, 2013 (India) [18] Legal Metrology Act, 2009, No. S.O. 1(E), Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, 2009 (India) [19] Companies Act, 1956, No. 121-C, Parliament of India, 1956 (India) [20] Companies Act, 2013, No. 121-C, Parliament of India, 2013 (India) [21] Companies Act, 2013, §2 (42), No. 121-C, Parliament of India, 2013 (India) [22] Companies Act, 2013, §2 (42), No. 121-C, Parliament of India, 2013 (India) [23] The Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Imperial Legislative Council, 1930 (India) [24] The Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Imperial Legislative Council, 1930 (India) [25] Indian Contract Act, 1872, No. 9, Imperial Legislative Council, 1872 (India) [26] Indian Contract Act, 1872, No. 9, Imperial Legislative Council, 1872 (India) [27] Information Technology Act, 2008, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2008 (India) [28] Information Technology Act, 2000, §10 A, No. 21, Parliament of India, 2000 (India) [29] The Competition Act, 2002, No. 12, Parliament of India, 2002 (India)
Commenti