Chandigarh Consumer commission order and analysis
The battery was replaced 6 to 7 times
Car manufacturer said no manufacturing defect exists
Car owner didn’t submit any technical and expert evidence about manufacturing defects but repeated visits to service center confirms mental harassment
Repeated visits to workshop within warranty period and persistent grievance establish that car owner suffered harassment
Thus, while refund/replacement cannot be granted, the complainant deserves reasonable compensation for inconvenience and mental agony suffered.
In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint is partly allowed and the OPs are directed to pay lump-sum compensation of Rs 4 lakh to the complainant for the harassment caused to him as well as litigation expenses, within 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which the said amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of this order till the date of its actual realization to the complainant.
On April 11, 2019, Mr Kaushal bought a new diesel automatic car for Rs 32.97 lakh and received it on April 26, 2019. He chose to get the insurance via the car dealer, which cost him Rs 98,075. Additionally, he had paid Rs 92,007 for the RTO registration fee. However, after three to four months, the vehicle started having issues.The vehicle’s electrical systems began to malfunction, and the battery would drain completely on its own, causing starting problems. When he reported this to the dealer. they tried to jumpstart the car and even replaced the battery, but nothing worked. The vehicle continued to have persistent issues.In January 2020, the car developed another problem, causing the battery to discharge again. This time, he reached out to the car manufacturer’s helpline, where he was advised to get the vehicle jumpstarted locally and to bring it to the service centre. He took the car to the service centre for a check-up to find out why the battery kept draining.The mechanical staff at the service center wanted to rip open the whole vehicle. But he objected to this and brought this to the notice of the car manufacturer through e-mails. He continued to write and wrote numerous e-mails, clearly expressing his persisting grievance that despite leaving his car at the service centre for several days, they still couldn’t identify the issue.Mr Kaushal voiced his frustration regarding the inspection of the back light, boot cover, dash board, infotainment system and other parts of the vehicle to identify the actual defect, yet the service center staff couldn’t identify the issue.The car manufacturer attempted to diagnose the defect and even installed a data logger to ascertain the root cause of the problem. It was reported that observational tests conducted after installation of the data logger showed fungus on the circuit board connected to the battery system, which was identified as the probable cause for the vehicle not starting.However, Mr Kaushal allegedly rejected these technical findings without producing any expert opinion and subsequent inspections failed to replicate the alleged defect. After further correspondence from him, the case was closed as “dissatisfied closure” and a repair report was shared.Mr Kaushal filed a consumer complaint against the service centre and the car manufacturer on April 19, 2021 and on February 20, 2026, won the case. The Chandigarh Consumer Commission said that even if a manufacturing defect is not conclusively proved, repeated recurrence of starting issues within the warranty period amounts to deficiency in service.The consumer commission ordered that Mr Kushal should receive Rs 4 lakh in a compensation for the harassment caused to him, along with litigation costs, to be paid within 45 days of receiving the certified copy of the consumer commission’s order. If this amount isn’t paid on time, it will accrue interest at a rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order until Mr Kaushal receives the payment.Advocate Gaurav Gaur who practices in the Delhi High Court, said to ET Wealth Online: This judgment of the District Consumer Commission, Chandigarh offers several important lessons for car owners who face recurring issues with newly purchased vehicles." It is also an important reminder for car owners that if a newly purchased vehicle repeatedly develops problems within the warranty period, the manufacturer and dealer can still be held accountable under consumer law.According to Gaur, one key legal aspect highlighted by the Commission is that if a consumer wants to claim replacement or refund of a vehicle on the ground of a “manufacturing defect,” it is generally necessary to support that allegation with technical or expert evidence. Without such evidence, consumer forums may hesitate to declare the entire vehicle defective.At the same time, the Commission also clarified that even if a manufacturing defect is not conclusively proved, persistent mechanical issues and repeated visits to the service centre can amount to “deficiency in service.” In such cases, the consumer may still be entitled to compensation for inconvenience, harassment and litigation expenses.Gaur says: "For other car owners, the practical takeaway is to maintain a proper record of every complaint, service visit, repair job card, warranty claim and email communication with the dealer or manufacturer. These documents become crucial evidence before consumer forums."According to Gaur, if the issue continues despite multiple repair attempts, consumers should not hesitate to seek legal advice and approach the appropriate Consumer Commission for relief such as repair, replacement, refund or compensation depending on the facts of the case.The Chandigarh District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, comprising Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) and B.M. Sharma (Member) heard and gave their judgement in this case on February 20, 2026 (CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. DC/AB1/44/CC/294/2021).The consumer commission said that the complainant (Mr Kaushal) purchased a vehicle in question on April 11, 2019 for a sum of Rs 32,97,000. It is not in dispute that the vehicle was insured and registered by the complainant after payment of requisite charges.The complainant has alleged that within 3–4 months of purchase, the vehicle started developing electrical issues and repeated battery drainage resulting in starting problems.The vehicle was taken to the service center on multiple occasions. The battery was reportedly replaced 6–7 times and various modules/components including SYNC/APIM Module, FCIM, Panel Fuse Junction and FCDIM were replaced. The complainant has alleged that despite this, the defect persisted.The consumer commission said that the car manufacturer pleaded that there is no manufacturing defect by contending that no expert evidence has been produced to establish manufacturing defect. Observational tests including installation of a data logger did not reveal any inherent defect. The vehicle had run approximately 15,000 kms. demonstrating usability, and repairs were carried out as goodwill measures.The Chandigarh Consumer Commission said that it is well settled that allegations of manufacturing defect must be supported by cogent technical and expert evidence.However, Mr Kaushal (car owner) has not placed on record any expert opinion or independent automobile inspection report to substantiate that the vehicle suffered from an inherent manufacturing defect.The Chandigarh consumer commission said: “Mere replacement of parts under warranty does not ipso facto establish a manufacturing defect in the vehicle as a whole.”Moreover, the record shows that the vehicle was examined on each complaint, a data logger testing was conducted to ascertain the cause of battery drainage, certain components were replaced as a precautionary/goodwill measure and the vehicle had run approximately 15000 kms. which indicates that it remained in regular use.The Chandigarh consumer commission said that though the complainant has not produced any expert evidence to conclusively establish inherent manufacturing defects so as to justify refund or replacement of the vehicle, it cannot be ignored that repeated visits to the workshop/service centre and continued inconvenience caused mental harassment and hardship to the complainant.The Chandigarh consumer commission said: “Even if a manufacturing defect is not conclusively proved, repeated recurrence of starting issues within the warranty period amounts to deficiency in service.”The Chandigarh Consumer Commission said that it is evident that the complainant had to repeatedly approach the service centre, various components including battery & electronic modules were replaced and the complainant was inconvenienced on numerous occasions.The Chandigarh consumer commission said: “Repeated visits to the workshop within the warranty period and persistent grievance establish that the complainant suffered inconvenience and harassment.”