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

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more