Car Manufacturing Defect Must Be Proved By Expert Report: Delhi State Commission Dismisses Complaint Against Volvo India And Its Dealer

The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, President and Pinki, Judicial member has dismissed a complaint against Volvo Auto India and its dealer for a manufacturing defect in the car in the absence of any expert report on record. It was held that the number of times a vehicle is taken to the workshop for repair does not decide whether there is a manufacturing defect. Brief facts: The complainant purchased a 'Volvo CX60 D5' car from Scandia Motor Cars Pvt. Ltd. ('dealer') manufactured by Volvo Auto India Pvt. Ltd. ('manufacturer') for a sum of Rs. 59,90,000/-. The complainant also paid a sum of Rs. 89,000/- towards logistics on 23.11.2020. On 15.09.2021, the car broke down and it was found that the engine was not cranking due to fuel adulteration. The car was then repaired by replacing the fuel rail and injector and was returned on 22.10.2021 with a 50% waiver on the repair cost given by the dealer. The same problem occurred again and the complainant was again offered a waiver of 50% on the expenses. As per the complainant, the dealer refused to share the certified lab report regarding fuel adulterant with him which led the complainant to believe that the car had a manufacturing defect. Hence, a complaint was filed before the State Commission praying for appropriate compensation. Submissions of the dealer: The dealer submitted that the car had already been in an accident on 29.01.2021 after which the car was sent to its service center. It was further submitted that the fuel sample taken from the car was contaminated with water. It was submitted that the fuel distribution pipe, fuel filter, one injector and a test drive of 60 Km revealed that the car was running perfectly. The dealer argued that the present repairs are not covered under warranty as it excludes cases of fuel adulteration. As per the dealer, the injectors have been replaced and the car is running fine. Submissions of the manufacturer: It was submitted by the manufacturer that the complainant had already filed a Recovedy Suit for Rs. 51,50,000 before the Commercial court at Saket for the same set of facts. It was further submitted that the manufacturer cannot be made liable since the dealer purchases the vehicles on a principal-to-principal basis from it at full price. Observations of the commission: The bench, at the outset, examined Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which clarifies that any dereliction with respect to any fault, imperfection or inadequacy in performance required by law in pursuance of a contract by a service provider is deficiency in service. It was observed that no expert has been appointed by the complainant to examine the defects in the vehicle. It was held that without any expert report it cannot be concluded that the car had manufacturing defects. Reliance was placed on the decision of the National Commission in Honda Cars India vs Jatinder Singh Madan wherein it was held without any expert report it cannot be decided that a vehicle has manufacturing defect. It was further observed that the number of times a vehicle has been taken for repair to the workshop does not amount to manufacturing defect. Hence, it was held that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the dealer nor is there any manufacturing defect proven on the part of the manufacturer- Volvo Auto India. Thus, the complaint was dismissed. Case Title: Veena Devi vs Scandia Motorcars Private Limited Case Number: Complaint Case 50/2022 Date of decision: 07.07.2025 Click Here To Read/Download The Order

Car Manufacturing Defect Must Be Proved By Expert Report: Delhi State Commission Dismisses Complaint Against Volvo India And Its Dealer

Aakanksha Bajoria

Tags