Maruti Udyog Ltd. vs S.C. SHARMA

THIS is a case where within 3 months of purchase of Maruti car the consumer had to take it to the authorised workshop for rectification of various defects and was shocked to know that the original engine had to be removed and in its place a new engine had to be fitted when the car had covered only 534 kms. Despite this, the defects in the car continued and fuel efficiency (km per litre) was below par.

THE case of the complainant is that he had taken the car within the first 3 months of purchase for first free service. THE car had the following defects: (i) Fuel Guage not working. (ii) Temperature guage showing overheating. (iii) Oil leakage from the engine. (iv) Dicky lock lose. (v) Silencer rattling. (vi) Low pickup.

After servicing, the car was not given back to him and he was informed by authorised workshop of Maruti Udyog Ltd. that it required major repairs. He was shocked to know that the engine had to be replaced and it would require a new identification (ID) plate fixed in the engine of the car. Though in due course the documentation viz., registration certificate could be completed, it caused him mental and physical harassment and monetary expenses. The rattling noise continued and the car was further repaired by adjusting the clutch plate for reducing the rattling noise during the second free service. Despite repairs, defects like low mileage (14 kms. per litre) and rattling noise of the engine persisted and ID plate was not changed.

The opposite parties contended that the defects were removed at the shortest possible time and even the half engine assembly was replaced. New ID plate would be issued only by the manufacturer after following the due procedure. Though the complainant had prayed that the opposite parties be directed to replace the car or in the alternative compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs. 2 lakh be paid, the District Forum "keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, directed the OPs to pay Rs. 60,000 to the complainant as compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act which shall be just, fair and reasonable to compensate them for the loss or injury suffered by the complainant on account of deficiency committed by the OPs. The OPs were also directed to pay Rs. 5000 as cost of litigation. The compensation be paid by the OPs to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall also be liable to pay interest to the complainant @ 9% per annum on Rs. 60,000 from the date of the order till the date of payment."

AGGRIEVED by the order of the District Forum M/s. Pasco Automobiles and Maruti Udyog Limited had filed appeals with a request to dismiss the complaint and complainant had filed an appeal for enhancement of compensation. The State Commission after going into the details of the case, the evidence produced by the parties and hearing the learned Counsel for the parties dismissed the cross-appeals. Dissatisfied with the order of the State Commission M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited has filed this revision. Learned Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the engine was changed to the satisfaction of the complainant. Regarding mileage there is no guarantee that the Maruti car will give high mileage and alleged rattling and low mileage could be due to bad road conditions and mishandling of the car. Change of the ID requires certain procedures to be followed and hence takes time. He further submitted that only after 11 months of 2nd service the complainant went to the workshop for the third free service. On the other hand learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that any purchaser of new vehicle would be shocked to learn that the engine itself had to be replaced after the car had covered hardly 500 km. It was not expected of a company like Maruti Udyog Ltd. to supply such a defective car. This fact has not been disputed by the revision petitioner. Despite persistent complaints the workshop could not remove the rattling noise or improve the fuel efficiency of the car. Findings : It is clear from the records of the case that the engine had to be replaced when the car had run only for 534 kms., during first free service. Such manufacturing defects will certainly cause mental agony and trauma to any consumer. Though the defects listed by the complainant viz., fuel guage not working; temperature guage showing overheating; oil leakage from the engine; dickey lock lose; silencer rattling and low pickup were repaired during the first free service, the rattling noise in the engine persisted and the car continued to give low mileage. It is a well known fact that Maruti car is considered to be one of the most fuel efficient cars and the roads in Chandigarh are some of the best in the country. Hence, there is no reason why a Maruti car, if it does not suffer from any manufacturing defects, should give only 14 km per litre.

REGARDING change of ID plate the learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Registration Authority was informed regarding the change in the engine number with a request to do the amendment in the registration certificate and same was done by the registering authority and no evidence was led to show that the complainant was ever harassed by the police on account of change in the number of ID Plate. As we have no proof of harassment by the police, the Revision Petition is partly accepted and directions given by the District Forum as affirmed in appeal by the State Commission to fix a new ID plate in the car in conformity with its correct chassis and engine numbers, is set aside. Considering overall facts of the case, we do not see any material irregularity or jurisdictional error in rest of the orders passed by the Fora below. Ordered accordingly. Revision Petition partly allowed.