One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.
Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.
TL;DR: If a brand deliberately withholds a specific processor model while heavily promoting the chipset brand name (like "Snapdragon" or "Dimensity"), and that omission materially influences a buyer's decision, it can absolutely qualify as a misleading advertisement under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The law doesn't require explicit lies—concealment of a material fact that makes the overall message deceptive is enough.
Rohan Gupta walked into a Reliance Digital store in Pune in early March 2025. The Realme 12x 5G display screamed “MediaTek Dimensity processor with lag-free gaming.” He bought it that afternoon, trusting the brand’s promise. Within days, his experience told a different story: frame drops, stutters, no “lag-free” feel. Digging deeper, he discovered the phone used a MediaTek Dimensity 6100+ chip—entry-level silicon, not the mid-range or flagship tier the marketing had implied. Realme’s own product page on Flipkart, the box, the in-store banners, none disclosed the exact model. Just “Dimensity.” Rohan felt cheated. His emails to customer support got templated replies. The retailer shrugged. He then approached the Chamber of Advocate Sudhir Rao. The earlier attempt with a general practice lawyer had been tepid: “it’s just marketing, nothing you can do.” That’s where the difference showed. Advocate Sudhir Rao’s office immediately recognised the omission was material. They crafted a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, arguing that the brand had engaged in an unfair trade practice by concealing the specific chipset—a key determinant of performance. The forum agreed. The order directed a refund and a penalty for the misleading advertisement. The client walked away vindicated in under four months.Key Facts of the Case
- The advertisement highlighted the processor brand name (“MediaTek Dimensity”) and promised “lag-free gaming” without revealing the exact chipset model.
- The actual processor, Dimensity 6100+, sits at the bottom of the Dimensity lineup, making the “lag-free” claim unrealistic for modern gaming.
- The phone’s official listing, packaging, and in-store materials all omitted the model number.
- The consumer relied on the brand’s representations and was materially influenced by them.
- A complaint was filed under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, citing misleading advertisement and unfair trade practice.
- The District Consumer Forum found the omission significant enough to distort the purchaser’s decision, and awarded relief.
The Direct Legal Answer
Can intentionally omitting the exact chipset while highlighting the Snapdragon brand be a misleading advertisement?
Yes, absolutely. Under Section 2(28) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a “misleading advertisement” includes any advertisement that conceals important information, thereby deceiving the consumer or influencing their transactional decisions when they would not have made that choice otherwise. The key word is “conceals.” You don’t need a false statement; a half-truth that traps a buyer into assuming a higher specification can be enough. And here’s the thing—when you slap “lag-free gaming” onto a phone with an entry-level processor, the overall communication becomes a deceptive narrative. The omission isn’t trivial. It’s a material fact. The law doesn’t demand that companies list every technical parameter, but if the marketing message sets up an expectation that depends on an undisclosed specification, the omission crosses the line into an unfair trade practice under Section 2(47).Is there a legal obligation to disclose the exact chipset model?
No statute explicitly mandates that every smartphone seller must publish the full processor model number. But the legal obligation arises from the context. Once a brand voluntarily links a chipset brand name to performance claims like “lag-free,” fairness demands that it either clarify the exact variant or refrain from making that claim when the undisclosed variant can’t deliver. The Central Consumer Protection Authority’s guidelines on misleading advertisements reinforce this: material facts that alter the bargain cannot be kept hidden.Advice in Such Cases
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Collect every piece of marketing material before the brand alters it. Screenshots, in-store photographs, product pages, even WhatsApp forwards from dealers—all of it. These cases turn on documentary evidence. Also, don’t fixate on the complaint alone; think about interim relief. Ask your advocate whether a quick ex-parte injunction can stop the brand from advertising the same misleading claim while your matter is pending.
Don’t walk into this with a generalist. Consumer law involves specific procedural tactics—notice periods, limitation timelines, and pleading standards under the Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission) Rules. An advocate who regularly handles deceptive advertising matters knows how to frame the omission as a material concealment rather than a subjective disappointment.
Applicable Sections of Law
- Section 2(28), Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Defines “misleading advertisement” to include any advertisement that conceals important information and thereby deceives the consumer.
- Section 2(47), Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Defines “unfair trade practice” broadly enough to cover material omission in promotional material.
- Section 89, Consumer Protection Act, 2019: Provides penalty for misleading advertisements, though enforcement usually happens through the consumer fora.
- Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020: Imposes additional disclosure obligations on e-commerce platforms listing products—helpful if the phone was bought online.
Limitation Period
A consumer complaint must be filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action arises. In omission cases like this, the cause of action typically arises the moment you discover—or ought to have discovered—the concealed fact. If you bought the phone on 5 March 2025 and unearthed the exact chipset model on 20 March 2025, your clock starts ticking around that discovery date. Missing the two-year window is fatal unless you can convince the forum that the delay should be condoned—and condonation isn’t easy.
Interim Reliefs Available
The consumer forum has no authority to issue temporary injunctions in the way civil courts do under Order 39 CPC. However, you can seek directions to the opposite party to stop publishing the misleading advertisement during the pendency of the complaint. In a pragmatic sense, a well-drafted complaint that exposes the omission often forces the brand to quietly edit its copy—even without a formal interim order. If the matter escalates to the civil court under the general law, you can invoke Order 39 CPC and even the Specific Relief Act, 1963 for a prohibitory injunction. But in the consumer forum, your focus stays on compensation, refund, and corrective advertising orders.
If You Are the Victim
- Document the advertisement exactly as it appeared: URLs, screenshots, timestamps, point-of-sale photographs.
- Write a formal legal notice to the manufacturer and the seller, demanding refund and cessation of the misleading ad.
- If the reply is unsatisfactory, file a complaint before the appropriate consumer forum—District, State, or National, depending on the value of goods and compensation claimed.
- Preserve the phone and its box in the same condition; do not root or tamper with the device.
- Avoid repairing it from unauthorized centers, as that can trigger an argument about damage or change of specifications post-sale.
Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Purchase invoice or receipt with date, model number, and price.
- Copy of the advertisement (screenshots, printouts, images of banners).
- Correspondence with the brand or seller (emails, chat transcripts, call recordings if legally obtained).
- Proof of payment—credit card statement, UPI transaction history.
- Any expert review or benchmark comparison showing the actual chipset’s performance gap.
- Your Aadhaar and PAN for identity verification.
- Any warranty card or box that shows the omitted information.
What Evidence Is Required?
- Primary evidence: The advertisement itself—digital or physical. Courts treat the original screenshot or photograph as primary evidence if you can prove its originality.
- Technical reviews and benchmark scores (secondary evidence) to demonstrate the gap between promise and reality.
- Expert affidavits, if needed, from a hardware engineer who can explain why the omission is material.
- Chain of emails or chat transcripts showing the brand’s refusal to clarify the specification.
- Testimony of witnesses who saw the same advertisement and were similarly misled, though usually not essential.
- The smartphone’s system information screen showing the actual chipset—useful to prove the fact of non-disclosure.
How Courts Typically Approach Such Cases
Consumer forums treat omission as deception when the missing detail would have stopped the reasonable buyer from making the purchase. Judges don’t require technical wizardry. They ask a simple question: did the ad create a false impression that a reasonable person would rely on? If the answer is yes, the forum usually leans in the consumer’s favour. And here’s the subtlety—forums in metropolitan commissions like Mumbai or Bengaluru have become fairly tech-aware and are quicker to spot the materiality of a chipset omission than five years ago. So your drafting must connect the dots clearly: show that “Dimensity” alone isn’t a performance promise.
Timeline of Legal Process
- Legal notice to the opposite party: 15–30 days for reply.
- Drafting and filing of consumer complaint: 1–2 weeks after notice period ends.
- Admission and issuance of notice by the forum: 2–4 weeks.
- Filing of written version (reply) by the opposite party: 30 days, extendable by 15 days.
- Evidence and arguments: 2–3 hearings, usually spread over 3–6 months.
- Order: Generally within 6–12 months from filing, though it can stretch longer.
- Execution or appeal: if the order is in your favour, the opposite party may comply or appeal; execution takes another few months.
Understanding the Costs
The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.
A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.
Can the Matter Be Settled Out of Court?
Absolutely. Consumer disputes are ripe for settlement. After you send a legal notice, many companies offer a refund or a replacement just to avoid litigation. You can also opt for mediation—District Consumer Forums routinely refer matters to mediation cells, and a settlement arrived there can be recorded as an award. Compromise is also possible under the general civil law through a written compromise deed. If the matter reaches the forum, the parties can jointly request disposal in terms of the settlement. For deceptive advertising cases, a settlement often includes a consent letter from the brand agreeing to modify the advertisement, which can be as valuable as a formal order.
Common Mistakes People Make
- Waiting too long to collect evidence—ads get pulled or altered within days.
- Approaching the wrong forum: claiming a high amount just to reach the State Commission when the District Forum would have been faster and cheaper.
- Filing a complaint without a legal notice first, missing the chance to settle quickly.
- Engaging a lawyer who doesn’t regularly handle consumer advertising matters. The difference between a complaint that reads like a rant and one that isolates the material omission with surgical precision often determines the outcome. Non-specialists may miss the nuance of Section 2(28) versus Section 2(47) pleading.
- Posting grievances on social media before the legal notice—this can backfire if the brand uses those posts to argue the consumer was acting with publicity motives rather than genuine grievance.
- Tampering with the phone or discarding the original box, which can weaken the evidentiary chain.
FAQs People Normally Have
Do I need to prove that I was personally misled, or is it enough that the ad was misleading in general?
You need to show that you were influenced by the advertisement. However, the consumer forum often infers reliance from the circumstances—like your purchase happening soon after seeing the promotional material.
Can I file a complaint even if I bought the phone from a physical store and not online?
Yes. The Consumer Protection Act covers all modes of sale—offline, online, teleshopping. The evidence rules are the same.
What compensation can I get?
Refund of the purchase price, compensation for mental agony and inconvenience, cost of litigation, and sometimes an additional penalty if the forum finds the practice deliberate. There is no fixed scale—it depends on the facts.
Is there any criminal liability for the brand?
Not from a consumer complaint alone. But if the same act amounts to cheating under Section 318 BNS, a separate criminal complaint is possible. That’s rare in omission cases, though.
Can I sue both the manufacturer and the retailer?
Usually yes. The retailer is often a necessary party, and you can join the manufacturer as co-opposite party for the misleading advertisement, since both benefit from the sale.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India