Skip to main content

Woman finds dent on car year after purchase, Honda, dealer to pay Rs. 30,000

Terming it guilty of deficiency in services, the district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed a car manufacturer and dealer to pay Rs. 30,000 as compensation to a Sector-30 resident.

Kamla Devi had approached the consumer forum against Honda Siel Cars India Limited and its dealer Lally Automobiles Pvt Ltd (Prestige Honda), Industrial Area. Phase 1, Chandigarh.

Kamla submitted that she purchased a Honda City car in May 2010. She said after over a year of purchase, she noticed a dent on the vehicle, even though the car had never met with an accident, which could only mean that a used vehicle was sold to her.

Denying Kamla's allegations, the car manufacturer and its dealer claimed that the dent could have occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the complainant herself.

After hearing the arguments, consumer forum held, “Even though the allegations of the complainant are not really proved, her anxiety on realising the dent in the vehicle, even though there is no hindrance to the running of the vehicle, cannot be overlooked. In the given situation, though we cannot pass orders to replace the vehicle or refund the price, we deem it appropriate to allow this complaint only to order the manufacturer and dealer to pay a consolidated compensation of Rs. 30,000."

"As it is not proved whether the dent is on account of the manufacturer or by the dealer, the amount will be shared equally by them. They would also pay `10,000 towards costs of litigation, which will also be shared equally by them,” it added.

 Article referred: http://www.hindustantimes.com/punjab/chandigarh/woman-finds-dent-on-car-year-after-purchase-honda-dealer-to-pay-rs-30-000/article1-1251324.aspx

 Comment: This would easily be one of the strangest orders I have come across.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more