Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Sept 22: For providing a defective vehicle and subjecting him to harassment during the warranty period, the High Court has directed the Maruti company and its dealer for compensation to the consumer.
The Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar directed for compensation of Rs. 1.65 lakh to the consumer for selling a defective car to him and subjecting him to repeated harassment during the warranty period.
The bench ordered the Maruti Suzuki India Limited to pay lump sum compensation of Rs. 1 lakh, and its dealers to pay Rs. 65000. “The petitioner-purchaser will thus be entitled to total compensation of Rs. 1.65 Lakh, to be paid by the respondent-company and its dealers within a period of one month”, the bench added.
The court clarified that in default, the amount of compensation shall become payable with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, to be reckoned after the expiry of one month from today till the amount is actually paid to the petitioner.
The aggrieved consumer had purchased a Maruti Swift Diesel car on August 8, 2014 from the dealer of the Maruti company, with a two-year/40,000 km warranty. Soon after purchase, the car developed technical defects including issues with the horn and battery.
Despite being serviced eighteen times within two years, the problem persisted. Alleging deficiency of service, he approached the District Consumer Forum in August 2016 and the Forum ordered either replacement of the defective car or refund of its price along with Rs. 10,000 as compensation and Rs. 5,000 as litigation costs.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order of District Forum, the company (Maruti Suzuki) through its dealer, appealed before the J&K State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which noted the buyer’s repeated workshop visits and held the company guilty of deficiency of service. However, it modified the relief to a lump sum compensation of Rs. 65,000 with 6% interest from March 2024.
The High Court opined that the award of compensation by the courts below is inadequate and enhanced the same to Rs. 1.65 lakh.
The bench observed that he has continued with the vehicle and never ever insisted for its replacement within the period of warranty, it would, therefore, be not appropriate to direct the replacement of the vehicle at this stage.
“However, we are of the considered opinion that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the harassment and mental agony suffered by the petitioner, the award of Rs. 65,000 as lump sum compensation is inadequate and on a lower side,” the bench observed.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
