KSLU Corner™ New AIBE previous QP

Letters to the consumer commission, Lok Adalat and RTI applications

Business Communications · Unit IV · Topic 12 of 15 · 6 min read

The law and the drafting for three set questions: a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (modelled on the lead-paint question), an application to a Lok Adalat under the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987, and an application under the Right to Information Act 2005 with the steps for filing and appeals.

On this page
  1. 1. Consumer redressal commissions: the law in brief
  2. 2. Model: complaint about paint with toxic lead
  3. 3. Lok Adalat
  4. 4. Right to Information Act, 2005
  5. How this is examined
Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

The examinable core. August 2024 asked for a letter to the consumer forum by “Mr. Suresh Rawat” complaining that a supplier sold paint with high levels of toxic lead (10 marks). The RTI application is set every year (January 2026 twice, January 2025), and the consumer redressal forum came as a note in January 2026. The “forum” of the syllabus is now called the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019; use the new name and mention the old one.

1. Consumer redressal commissions: the law in brief

2. Model: complaint about paint with toxic lead

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU URBAN
Consumer Complaint No. ____ of 2026

Mr. Suresh Rawat, aged 42, No. 18, 4th Cross, Jayanagar, Bengaluru – 560 041 … Complainant
versus
M/s Colourhome Paint Suppliers, represented by its Proprietor, 7 Market Road, Jayanagar, Bengaluru – 560 011 … Opposite Party

Complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

1. On 4 March 2026 the complainant bought 40 litres of “Brightwall” enamel paint from the opposite party for Rs. 16,800 (Invoice No. 1187, Annexure A) to paint his house, telling the opposite party that it was for a home with two young children.
2. In April 2026 his younger child, aged four, developed stomach pain and irritability. Blood tests showed raised lead levels (Annexure B). A sample of the paint, tested at an accredited laboratory, contained 1,850 ppm of lead (Annexure C).
3. The Household and Decorative Paints (Regulation of Lead Contents) Rules, 2016 prohibit the sale of household paint containing more than 90 ppm of lead. The paint sold was therefore hazardous and defective, and its sale as safe for homes is an unfair trade practice.
4. The complainant’s legal notice of 10 May 2026 (Annexure D) was not answered.
5. The cause of action arose at Jayanagar, Bengaluru, within this Commission’s jurisdiction; the value paid is within its pecuniary limits; and the complaint is within two years.

Prayer: the complainant prays that the Commission direct the opposite party to (a) refund Rs. 16,800; (b) pay Rs. 1,20,000 for repainting the house; (c) pay Rs. 2,00,000 as compensation for the child’s illness, medical expenses and mental agony; (d) withdraw the paint from sale; and (e) pay costs of Rs. 10,000.

Verification: I, Suresh Rawat, state that the facts above are true to my knowledge. Verified at Bengaluru on 20 June 2026.
(signature) Complainant
Encl: Annexures A to D; affidavit

A product-liability claim against the manufacturer can be added under Chapter VI of the Act; if the question names only the supplier, sue the supplier as a product seller.

3. Lok Adalat

Model application (body): “To The Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Belagavi. Sub: Application for reference of O.S. No. 214/2024 (pending before the Principal Civil Judge, Belagavi) to the next Lok Adalat. Sir, I am the plaintiff in the above suit for recovery of Rs. 3,40,000 from the defendant. The defendant has offered to pay in instalments, and both of us wish to settle. I request that the suit be referred to the forthcoming Lok Adalat under section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The defendant’s consent letter is enclosed.”

4. Right to Information Act, 2005

Model RTI application

To
The Public Information Officer, Office of the Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Dharwad

Sub: Application under section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005

1. Name: Priya Desai · 2. Address: 12 Saptapur, Dharwad – 580 001 · 3. Phone/e-mail: 9xxxxxxxx0
4. Information sought (for the period 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2026):
(a) the sanctioned estimate and amount spent on repair of the Kelgeri Road, Dharwad;
(b) name of the contractor and a copy of the work order;
(c) copies of the measurement book entries and completion certificate;
(d) the defect-liability period under the contract and action taken on complaints during it.
5. I would like the information as certified photocopies; I will pay the copying charges.
6. Fee: Rs. 10 paid by Indian Postal Order No. ____ / online receipt No. ____.
7. I am a citizen of India.

Place: Dharwad · Date: 1 October 2026 · (signature) Priya Desai

How this is examined

“Application under the RTI Act” (short note, January 2026, 100 marks); “short note on the RTI Act” (January 2026, 6); “What is the RTI Act? What are the steps for filing an application?” (January 2025, 10); “consumer redressal forum” (January 2026, 6); the lead-paint complaint (August 2024, 10). Lok Adalat is in the syllabus and is a likely note. In drafting answers, cite the section under which you file.

Now try the real questions: Business Communications past question papers.