High Court To Maruti: Replace Customer’s 800 For Manufacturing Defect

We have often encountered cases where people, after buying new cars, have faced issues with their vehicles. They end up making several visits to the dealership and service center to resolve their issues. In some cases, customers file complaints against the dealership and manufacturer in the consumer court when they are denied a resolution. The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court recently made a ruling stating that customers have the right to get their vehicles replaced if there is a manufacturing defect.

The court’s ruling came in response to a petition filed by M/s Maruti Udyog Limited, challenging an order passed by the State Consumer Commission. Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta, presiding over the case, stated, “Repairs may be called for if the vehicle, purchased during the course of its use, suffers from a technical defect, and not where the vehicle has a manufacturing defect.”

The case was filed by a customer, Mr. Ramesh Chander Sharma, who had bought a Maruti 800 hatchback from Pathankot Vehicleades Pvt. Limited, Pathankot, for Rs. 1,94,195.60. The exact year when the car was bought is not known.

Shortly after buying the car, the customer found that there was an issue with it. He brought this issue to the attention of the dealership and service center. After several delays, the dealership inspected the vehicle only to find that the engine had a manufacturing defect.

When the customer realized this, he demanded that the dealership replace the car, while the dealership insisted on repairing the engine. When Sharma saw that there was no resolution to his issue, he took the matter to the Divisional Consumer Forum in Jammu, seeking a replacement for the faulty vehicle with a new one. The dealership and the manufacturer told the forum that the defect in the engine was minor and could be repaired.

After analyzing all the evidence and inspecting the vehicle, the Divisional Forum concluded that the vehicle had a manufacturing defect and needed to be replaced, not repaired. The forum also directed the dealership to either provide a replacement vehicle or refund the purchase amount, totaling Rs. 1,94,195.60, along with 9% interest per annum. In addition, Sharma was also held entitled to Rs. 1000/- as the cost of litigation.

Maruti Suzuki then appealed and challenged this ruling in the State Consumer Commission. The appeal, however, was dismissed for two reasons: it was filed after the limitation period had expired, and it lacked the mandatory pre-deposit of 1/4th of the awarded sum.

The High Court upheld the State Commission’s ruling and also examined the Divisional Forum’s order before coming to a conclusion. The court, in its ruling, even distinguished between technical defects arising from wear and tear during use, which may necessitate repairs, and manufacturing defects inherent from the outset.

It remains to be seen whether Maruti Suzuki will appeal to the higher court or simply return the Rs. 1.94 lakh to the customer along with the 9 percent interest per annum. The manufacturer cannot replace the car anymore as Maruti had discontinued the 800 hatchback in 2014. We have seen consumer court rule out similar judgements in the past. We recently came across a case where consumer court asked Hyundai to pay Rs 15 lakh compensation to the customer for selling car with defective engine. Toyota was also instructed to pay Rs 32 lakh to a customer for airbag failure.