Order Name: M/S. T&T Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S. CJ Darcl Logistics Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: F.A. No. 725/2021
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, under the leadership of Dr. Inder Jit Singh, has held T&T Motors accountable for failing to provide timely repair services for a Mercedes Benz car that was still under warranty.
Case Background:
The complainant bought a Mercedes Benz from T&T Motors for Rs. 27,08,189. Unfortunately, the car broke down during a rainstorm in Delhi and was sent for repairs. Despite receiving over five repair estimates that exceeded the car’s cost, the car was not returned even after three months. The complainant’s attempts to communicate with the dealer were ignored. Believing there was a manufacturing defect, the complainant took the issue to the State Commission of Delhi. The State Commission ruled in favor of the complainant, ordering the dealer to pay Rs. 2,50,000 as compensation for the inconvenience and Rs. 50,000 for litigation costs. Unsatisfied with this ruling, the dealer appealed to the National Commission.
Dealer’s Arguments:
The dealer contended that the State Commission had not considered the delays caused by factors beyond their control, such as approvals and parts procurement. They also mentioned that they had offered a courtesy car to the complainant, which was declined. According to them, the repairs were completed, and the car was ready for delivery, with the final delays being due to insurance processing. The dealer argued that there was no service deficiency on their part and that any compensation should be the manufacturer’s responsibility.
National Commission’s Observations:
The National Commission noted that the State Commission had correctly identified the complainant’s status as a consumer and found the dealer’s service to be deficient. Drawing on the case of Crompton Greaves Limited and Ors. Vs. Dailer Chrysler India Private Limited and Ors., the Commission emphasized that consumers have the right to seek redress for defective products or services. The four-month delay in repairing the high-end car without an adequate explanation led to significant inconvenience and mental distress for the complainant. Citing Supreme Court rulings in Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan and Aleya Sultana and Ors. vs. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. and Charan Singh v. Healing Touch Hospital, the Commission reiterated that compensation under consumer protection laws includes physical, mental, or emotional suffering.
The National Commission upheld the State Commission’s order, dismissing the dealer’s appeal.
Takeaway:
This judgment underscores the rights of consumers to timely and efficient service, especially when products are under warranty. Dealers must ensure they provide prompt service or face the consequences of legal action and compensation claims.
