Articles
Theory of defects in Vehicles and liabilities of Seller & Manufacturere ( Landmark Judgments ) Part-3
Theory of defects in Vehicles and liabilities of
Seller & Manufacturere
(
Landmark Judgments )
Part-3
Title- Dealer
and Manufacturer is principal to principal and not as principal and
agent
- Case Law :Indian Oil Corporation V
Consumer Protection Council Kerala 2004 ,SC
In the case of Indian
Oil Corporation V Consumer Protection Council Kerala 2004 ,SC had held
that relationship between the dealer and manufacturer is principal to principal
and not as principal and agent .Hence both are liable for their own wrongs .
- Honda
Cars India Limited vs Sudesh Berry on 12 November, 2021 SC
“Honda
Cars India Limited vs Sudesh Berry before the Supreme Court of
India, the apex court overturned a decision of National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission (“NCDRC“) and reiterated that a vehicle
manufacturer cannot be held liable for any defects in the performance of a
dealer and/or an authorised service centre while servicing vehicles.
“As the
facts on record show that the car was used by respondents no.1 to 3 for more
than 10 years, whereafter it suffered an accident. There is not an iota of
material that the accident occurred as a result of any manufacturing defect. If
there be any deficiency in service by the dealer or the authorized centre in
rendering assistance for repairs of the vehicle, the manufacturer of the
vehicle cannot be held liable”.
- TATA Motors Ltd. v. Antonio Paulo Vaz &
Another, 2021 SCC Online SC 125.
The above
law on the point is very clear by the decision of this Court in the
above case also
Expert
opinion for declaring manufacturing defect in vehicle not necessary if could
not be repaird trying time and again
time
Case
Law;Tata Motors Ltd. &Others V/S Dr Anuj Paul Maini &others decided on
18.02.2014
National
Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has pronounced an order on the same issue
further elaborating this theory in the matter of Tata Motors Ltd. &Others
V/S Dr Anuj Paul Maini &others decided on 18.02.2014. In this case,
complainant had purchased a Tata Indigo Marina Dictor and was delivered on
18.4.2007. On a local ride before issue of invoice, vehicle was found having as
many as eight defects which were removed without charging anything. Defects so
pin pointed were –
On
20.11.07 vehicle met with an accident finding dead animal on the road. It got
stuck and resultantly turned the steering to the left side and landed in a deep
trench and car was damaged. Complainant alleged manufacturing defect before the
consumer forum and obtained an order for replacement of the car with
compensation .State commission however ordered for Rs 3 lac to the complainant
for repair of the vehicle along with cost of litigation to the tune of Rs
2000/-
Now
matter had come before the National Commission. National Commission held that
the car went to the workshop as many as eleven times. Defect was admitted right
in the beginning even before issue of invoice which amounts to manufacturing
defect and it is presumed that it might have caused accident .Hence there is
absolutely no need to take expert opinion at this stage. SC also confirmed this
order
By
Dr Prem Lata
Become a Member of the new revolution "Consumer Awakening" and instantly expand your knowledge with the Important Landmark Judgements, Laws Laid down by the Supreme Court for Consumer Rights, Get access to hundreds of Featured Articles in 2 different Languages; English and Hindi - a valuable professional resource to draw upon, and a powerful, collective voice to advocate for your protection of rights as a consumer nationwide.
Thank you for your interest in becoming a "Consumer Awakening" Member!
You will find information on Customer Rights, what we're doing and how to become a member. If you are looking forward to become a member of our portal and gain access to Hundreds of Featured Articles which will clearly give you an insight of yoru rights as a Consumer, then Read Further. more detail on our technologies and technology process,
