Legal provisions involved: Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Judgement by: High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh

Bench/Judge: Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar

Facts 

The complainant bought an SX-4 car from an authorized dealer in 2007. Soon after, the car started showing persistent vibrations in the first and reverse gears. Despite taking the car to the dealer several times between 2007 and 2009 for repairs, the problem was never fixed. The car stayed with the dealer from 2009 without proper repair. The complaint was filed while the car was still under warranty.

Key legal provisions involved 

Consumer protection law concerning deficiency in service and the responsibility of both dealers and manufacturers when defects appear during the warranty period.

Issues raised

Whether the dealer and manufacturer were jointly responsible for not fixing the problem under warranty. 

Arguments of the case 

The manufacturer argued that reports showed the car was roadworthy and claimed it was not allowed to present evidence at the start of the case. The complainant presented an independent inspection confirming the vibrations and showed that repeated repair attempts had failed, proving it was a manufacturing defect.

Judgement 

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that authorized dealers act on behalf of the manufacturer for maintenance. Since the defect appeared during the warranty period and was not repaired despite multiple attempts, both dealer and manufacturer were jointly responsible. The court upheld the earlier order directing them to refund ₹7,00,000 plus ₹5,000 for litigation, while the complainant could keep the car. The appeal was dismissed, as the court found the evidence and reasoning of the Commission correct.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.