Caveat Emptor To Caveat Venditor: The Case For A Necessary Transition In Indian Jurisprudence
- IJLLR Journal
- Mar 21
- 1 min read
Dil Prithviraj Sen, Jindal Global Law School
ABSTRACT
This paper argues that the transition from caveat emptor ("buyer beware") to caveat venditor ("seller beware") in Indian consumer law is long overdue. Caveat emptor, inherited from British colonial rule and codified in the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, has placed an unrealistic burden on buyers, allowing sellers to evade accountability. Despite safeguards under Section 16 of the Act, judicial interpretations have consistently disadvantaged consumers. Landmark judgments such as Commissioner of Customs v. Aaflooat Textiles (2009) and United Bank of India v. Official Liquidators illustrate how buyers have been left without recourse under this outdated doctrine.
Recognizing this exploitation, India has progressively moved toward caveat venditor, culminating in the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This legislation strengthens consumer rights, mandates full disclosure by sellers, and holds manufacturers and e-commerce platforms accountable. By doing so, India aligns with global consumer protection standards, such as the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) and the U.S. Truth in Lending Act (TILA). However, challenges remain in enforcement, particularly for rural consumers who lack awareness of their rights. For caveat venditor to take full effect, India must enhance consumer education, streamline dispute resolution, and impose stricter penalties on deceptive sellers. Strengthening these protections is essential for ensuring fair and equitable transactions in India's evolving marketplace.
