Chapter VI - Product Liability
Section 86
Section 86: liability of product sellers
A seller that did not manufacture a product can still face a product-liability action under section 86 when a specified seller-side condition is met.
On this page
Need advice on Section 86?
This article is for general information. Refer to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 official text for the official provisions. If you need professional advice for your situation, contact Bizeneed.
Statutory text
Bare law
A product seller who is not a product manufacturer shall be liable in a product liability action, if—
(a) he has exercised substantial control over the designing, testing, manufacturing, packaging or labelling of a product that caused harm; or
(b) he has altered or modified the product and such alteration or modification was the substantial factor in causing the harm; or
(c) he has made an express warranty of a product independent of any express warranty made by a manufacturer and such product failed to conform to the express warranty made by the product seller which caused the harm; or
(d) the product has been sold by him and the identity of product manufacturer of such product is not known, or if known, the service of notice or process or warrant cannot be effected on him or he is not subject to the law which is in force in India or the order, if any, passed or to be passed cannot be enforced against him; or
(e) he failed to exercise reasonable care in assembling, inspecting or maintaining such product or he did not pass on the warnings or instructions of the product manufacturer regarding the dangers involved or proper usage of the product while selling such product and such failure was the proximate cause of the harm.
Introduction
Section 86 is not a blanket rule making every retailer liable for every product defect. It identifies specific routes based on the seller's control, alteration, independent express warranty, manufacturer availability or failure to exercise reasonable care or pass on warnings.
The claim also sits within Chapter VI's harm and defective-product framework. Section 87(1) separately addresses a product misused, altered or modified at the time of harm; examine all facts before drawing a conclusion.
Key takeaways
Seller activity can change exposure
Substantial control of design, testing, manufacturing, packaging or labelling, or a material seller modification, are distinct grounds.
Independent promises matter
A seller's express warranty independent of the manufacturer's warranty can engage section 86 if the product fails to meet it and causes harm.
Manufacturer reachability matters
The section covers specified cases where the manufacturer's identity is unknown, legal process cannot be effected, Indian law does not reach the manufacturer or an order cannot be enforced.
Warnings and care matter
A seller's failure of reasonable care in assembling, inspecting or maintaining the product, or failure to pass on manufacturer warnings, is relevant where it proximately causes harm.
Identify the seller's role
Map whether the seller merely supplied the product or controlled design, testing, packaging or labelling, or altered the item. Maintain records of seller-side modifications and approvals. Section 86(a) and (b) depend on the degree of control or modification and its connection to harm.
Review independent seller promises
Check marketplace listings, invoices, advertising and customer messages for promises made by the seller separately from the manufacturer's warranty. Section 86(c) requires a failure to conform to that independent warranty that caused harm.
Keep manufacturer and safety records
Retain manufacturer identity and contact details, instructions, warnings, inspection and maintenance records. Clauses (d) and (e) address manufacturer reachability and seller care or warning failures, with specific causation conditions.
Check the statutory exception
Section 87(1) says a product-liability action cannot be brought against a seller if, at the time of harm, the product was misused, altered or modified. Apply the provision to evidence about the actual product and event; do not assume an exception without a factual review.
Hypothetical example
A seller relabels a product and changes its safety warning before sale. After an injury complaint, it retains supplier documents, the original and altered labels, and transaction records to assess whether a section 86 seller-liability ground applies.
Official sources
Practical checklist
Do
- Retain manufacturer identity and reachable service details.
- Review seller-created warranties and listing claims.
- Record any seller modification, assembly, inspection and maintenance.
- Pass on manufacturer instructions and danger warnings to purchasers.
Avoid
- Do not assume being a marketplace seller automatically prevents product-liability exposure.
- Do not make a product promise that the item cannot meet.
- Do not discard evidence of warnings or product condition after a complaint.
Glossary
- Product seller
- A person covered by the Act's definition who places a product for commercial purpose through sale or related activities.
- Proximate cause
- The required close causal link between the specified seller failure and the harm in section 86(e).
Frequently asked questions
Can a seller be liable even if it did not manufacture the product?
Yes, but only if a section 86 condition is established within the Chapter VI product-liability framework.
Can seller promises create exposure?
An independent express warranty that the product fails to meet and that causes harm is one route under section 86(c).
Is a marketplace listing always enough to prove liability?
No. The relevant section 86 condition, causation and any applicable section 87 exception depend on evidence.
Need help applying this provision to your situation?
Contact BizeneedLast updated 10 October 2026