The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra, has directed a car dealer to refund ₹3.52 lakh to a buyer after finding deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in a second-hand luxury car transaction.
The commission found that the dealer had received the entire amount from the complainant but later took back the vehicle on the assurance that its defects would be repaired. The car was neither returned to the buyer nor was the amount refunded.
A bench comprising President Hemanshu Mishra and members Arti Sood and Narayan Thakur ordered the dealer to refund ₹3.52 lakh and additionally pay ₹30,000 as compensation for mental agony and ₹7,500 towards litigation costs.
In its September 3 order, the commission observed that taking back the vehicle on the pretext of carrying out repairs, while retaining both the vehicle and the full payment and failing to respond to requests for delivery or refund, amounted to gross deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Buyer Paid ₹3.52 Lakh In Three Instalments
According to the complaint, the buyer agreed to purchase a second-hand luxury car from the dealer and initially transferred ₹90,000 through Google Pay as a token amount.
On June 25, 2024, the dealer sought another ₹45,000 towards servicing and repairs, which the complainant also paid through Google Pay. A further ₹2.10 lakh was transferred on August 27, 2024, from the bank account of the complainant’s father to the dealer.
The total amount paid in connection with the purchase and repair of the vehicle came to ₹3.52 lakh.
Vehicle Allegedly Developed Problems After Delivery
The complainant alleged that the vehicle showed serious operational problems immediately after delivery, particularly with its battery and overall mechanical condition.
After the issues were brought to the dealer’s notice, the dealer allegedly assured the buyer that the defects would be rectified. The vehicle was then taken back with an assurance that it would be returned in proper working condition.
The complainant claimed that the dealer subsequently failed to return the repaired vehicle and continued making excuses before ultimately refusing either to deliver the car or refund the money.
The buyer then approached the consumer commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The dealer did not appear before the commission and was consequently proceeded against ex parte.
Bank Records Established Payments, Commission Finds
The commission found that the complainant had established through affidavits and bank records that ₹3.52 lakh had been paid in three instalments towards the purchase and repair of the second-hand luxury vehicle.
It held that accepting the entire agreed consideration while failing to provide a mechanically sound and operational vehicle amounted to a failure to discharge fundamental contractual obligations.
The commission further found that retaining both the buyer’s money and the vehicle after taking it back for promised repairs constituted deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
Accordingly, the dealer was directed to refund ₹3.52 lakh to the complainant, along with ₹30,000 for mental agony and ₹7,500 as litigation costs.
