CA – MAR 15 – SETTLED IN COURT
- Posted by CERC India
- Posted in monthly
SETTLED IN COURT
Tata Motors, dealer shell out Rs. 6.45 lakh for faulty car
Ashit Shah’s newly purchased car, a Tata Indigo costing Rs. 4.59 lakh, turned out to be a Pandora’s box. It revealed one defect after another for months. He visited the manufacturer and the dealer, Cargo Motors, Ahmedabad. They replaced many major components but the defects persisted. The car had to be sent for repair 20 times in seven months! As Shah recalled, â€œWithin the first three months, they changed the fuel pumps, AC fittings, coils, power steering, among other original parts.â€ But the manufacturing defects remained undetected, resulting in much inconvenience and mental agony to Shah.
His pleas to Cargo Motors and Tata Motors yielded no results. He contacted CERS and a case was filed in the Consumer Forum asking for replacement of the car or full refund. The Forum ruled in favour of the complainants. It observed that if a new car reveals mechanical problems on or soon after purchase and subsequent repairs cannot set things right, they should be attributed to manufacturing defects. The Forum directed Cargo Motors and Tata Motors to replace Shahâ€™s old car with a new one of the same make and model. If not so replaced within a month, the opposite parties should pay him Rs. 4.59 lakh with 9% interest from the date of filing the complaint until the date of payment, Rs. 5,000 for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000 towards costs.
Aggrieved, the manufacturer and dealer appealed to the State Commission. It dismissed the appeal and upheld the Forumâ€™s verdict. The opposite parties paid Shah Rs. 6.45 lakh towards the full refund of the purchase price with interest and compensation for mental agony and harassment.
India Post ordered to pay student Rs. 1.5 lakh for late delivery
Sayyeda Madiha, resident of Delhi, had applied for admission to the B. Tech and B. Arch courses in Aligarh Muslim University. She paid Rs. 2 lakh for two years of coaching for the entrance examination. The university sent her the admit card for the examination by speed post. It did not reach her in time and she could not appear for the entrance examination, resulting in great mental agony and financial loss.
She complained to the Consumer Forum accusing the postal authorities of deficiency in service and prayed for the payment of Rs. 2 lakh incurred on her coaching and Rs. 10 lakh towards compensation, besides costs. What had happened was that a substitute postman had kept the article in deposit, awaiting confirmation of the address by the regular postman. As a result, the delivery of the article was delayed by a week. The two postmen admitted the mistake. The counsel for the Post Master, however, referred to Section 6 of the Indian Telegraph Act which says that the Government shall not incur any liability by reason of the loss, misdelivery, delay or damage, unless caused fraudulently or by wilful act or deceit.
The Forum observed that the postal department committed a wilful negligent act by keeping the letter with it undelivered that caused the loss of future prospects of the complainant. It awarded a compensation of Rs. 1.5 lakh to the complainant and directed India Post to initiate proceedings for the recovery of this amount from the postman who was responsible for the delivery of the article.