Articles

Theory of defects in Vehicles and liabilities of Seller & Manufacturere ( Landmark Judgments ) Part-4

Theory of defects in Vehicles and liabilities of Seller & Manufacturere

( Landmark Judgments )

Part-4

Expert opinion for declaring manufacturing defect in vehicle not necessary if could not be repaird trying  time and again time

 

Case No -1 ;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

 

Case No-2 Jose Philip Mampillil V/S Premier Automobiles Ltd. And Anr on 27 January, 2004(SC)

This is the case where court has made certain points very clear:

1.      In case by repairing or replacing any part, vehicle works well, there is no need to replace the vehicle with the new one.

2.      If vehicle is bearing a defect at the initial stage and knowing full well a defective vehicle is sold, complainant is entitled to get compensation for mental agony and harassment he has undergone.

3.      If the vehicle is sent for repair time and again and cannot be repaired, there is no need to further obtain expert opinion for declaring manufacturing defect. 

Where manufacturer was also made responsible ,No expert opinion required

“From the material on record, it is clear that the car was defective at the time of delivery. There is no doubt that there were defects in the paint and that the piston rings of the engine had gone. The submission that the piston rings got spoiled after the delivery was taken, cannot be accepted. The agent of both parties had acknowledged that the piston rings were defective. They would not have so acknowledged unless it was a defect at the time of the delivery. ”

 

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,