A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited

A consumer complaint was filed by Aparna, the wife of a deceased man Mihir, who died in a car fire involving a Ford Endeavour. The Petitioner challenged the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, which limited her ability to approach the National Commission based on the price paid rather than the compensation claimed. The facts of the case are given below: Mihir purchased a Ford Endeavour Titanium for ₹ 32 lakhs. On 20th November, 2018, the vehicle caught fire during use which resulted in the death of Mihir. A criminal proceedings were initiated following the incident. Aparna, filed a consumer complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in which she claimed compensation of ₹ 52 crores for the loss. The complaint was filed before the District Consumer Commission, Vadodara, due to the new pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. She contended that under the 1986 Act, she could have approached the National Commission directly as jurisdiction was based on the amount claimed and not the consideration paid. It was contended that the current regime under the 2019 Act violates Article 14 of the Indian Constitution due to its arbitrary and discriminatory impact on access to justice and disrupts the hierarchy of judicial forums. Based on the above facts, answer the following questions with regard to the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Is it constitutional to determine pecuniary jurisdiction based on the amount paid and not on the basis of compensation claimed ? Does this classification violate Article 14 of the Indian Constitution ?