Chandigarh Consumer Commission Orders BMW India To Refund ₹1.32 Crore For Defective BMW X7

Brief Facts of the Case:

The Complainant, M/s Ambika Realcon Developers Pvt. Ltd., a Chandigarh-based company, purchased a BMW X7 xDrive40d M Sport—a luxury SUV costing around ₹1.5 crore—for the personal use of its Director. To finance the vehicle, the company availed a loan of ₹1.31 crore from Axis Bank, which was directly disbursed to the BMW dealership on 26 April 2024. The remaining amount was paid by the complainant, and the vehicle was delivered the same day. The complainant additionally spent substantial amounts on TCS, accessories, PPF coating, comprehensive insurance, and a 4-year extended warranty.

However, within just two months of purchase and barely 2000 km of usage, the car developed major technical problems. On 1 July 2024, the sunroof was damaged by a stone, and the vehicle was taken to the Faridabad workshop the next day. During repairs, the dealership discovered serious electrical issues, initially blaming the battery but later confirming a defect in the DME (Digital Motor Electronics)—a central electronic component that controls the vehicle's entire engine and performance systems.

BMW informed the complainant that the defective DME needed to be imported from Germany and kept the vehicle for 43 days, providing only an inferior BMW X1 as a temporary replacement. Despite assurances and repeated apologies over email, the dealership failed to provide a clear repair timeline. Even after the claimed repair and return of the vehicle on 13 August 2024, the same “power problem” reappeared within a week. The car was again handed over on 2 September 2024, showing a pattern of unresolved recurring defects.

Despite a legal notice seeking a full refund or replacement, BMW did not provide any satisfactory response or documentation of repairs. The complainant thus filed a consumer complaint seeking refund of the vehicle cost, EMI interest, accessory costs, insurance charges, and compensation for mental agony and reputational harm.

The consumer complaint was filed against Opposite Party (OP) No.1 – BMW India Pvt. Ltd. (Manufacturer); OP No.2 – Vikram Pawah, Managing Director; OP No.3 – Thomas Walter Dose, Whole-time Director; OP No.4 – Marianne Louise Campbell Holt, Whole-time Director; OP No.5 – BMW Krishna Automobiles (Authorized Dealer); OP No.6 – Axis Bank (Financer); and OP No.7 – Deutsche Cars Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad (Authorized Service Workshop).

Contentions of the Complainant:

The complainant, Ambika Realcon Developers Pvt. Ltd., argued that the newly purchased ₹1.5 crore BMW X7 developed major defects—battery failure, wiring issues, radiator fan malfunction, and especially a faulty DME unit—within weeks of purchase. Despite repeated repairs and keeping the car in the workshop for 43 days, the defects persisted, indicating a manufacturing defect. BMW did not provide diagnostic reports, delayed repairs, and offered only an inferior loaner car. The complainant said the vehicle was bought for the Director's personal use, making the company a consumer, and sought refund and compensation for financial loss and mental harassment.

Contentions of the Opposite Parties:

BMW India and its Directors argued that the complaint was not maintainable since the car was allegedly purchased for commercial purposes, and thus the complainant was not a consumer. They claimed no manufacturing defect was proven, that the DME was replaced with the complainant's consent, and that delays occurred only because the part had to be imported. They also said the complainant refused to take delivery after repairs. The dealer and workshop asserted they only performed repairs as required, replaced many parts under warranty, and were wrongly made parties. Axis Bank submitted it only provided the loan and had no role in the dispute.

Observations and Decision of the Commission:

The Commission observed that the BMW X7 developed serious mechanical and electrical defects soon after purchase, including power failures, wiring issues, radiator fan faults and, most importantly, a defective DME (Digital Motor Electronics) unit. Even after replacement, the same issues returned, proving a recurring manufacturing defect.

The Commission further noted that BMW failed to maintain transparency by refusing to provide diagnostic reports to the complainant, and held that the sequence of repeated breakdowns constituted clear deficiency in service. BMW's contention that the complainant was not a 'consumer' was rejected, as the vehicle had been purchased for the personal use of the Director, and not for any commercial activity. Consequently, BMW India Pvt. Ltd. and its Directors were held jointly and severally liable for the defects and deficiencies.

Based on these findings, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and issued the following directions:

1. Opposite Parties (OPs) 1 to 4 — BMW India Pvt. Ltd. and its three Directors — shall refund ₹1,32,90,000, being the cost of the vehicle, along with interest @12% per annum from 26.04.2024. In case of default, penal interest @13% per annum shall apply from the date of the order until realization.
2. OPs 1 to 5 — the manufacturer, its Directors, and the authorized dealer BMW Krishna Automobiles — shall jointly and severally pay ₹75,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment, and ₹35,000 as litigation costs, within 30 days. On default, the amounts shall carry penal interest @9% per annum from the date of the order.
3. The complaint was dismissed against OP 6 – Axis Bank (Financer) and OP 7 – Deutsche Cars Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad (Workshop), with no order as to costs.

Case Title: M/s Ambika Realcon Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. BMW India Pvt. Ltd. & Others

Case NO.: SC/4/CC/87/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order