Consumer court directs Maruti to replace car with E20 model

Raipur | Correspondent: Amidst ongoing nationwide discussions regarding E20 ethanol-blended petrol, a significant case has emerged from Raipur, the capital of Chhattisgarh. Acting on a consumer's complaint, the Raipur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered Maruti Suzuki India Limited to provide a new car.

In its order, the Commission directed the company to provide the complainant with a new car of the same model that is compatible with E20 fuel within 45 days. If the new car is not delivered within the stipulated timeframe, the company must pay ₹20,50,494, which includes the full cost of the vehicle.

Additionally, the Commission ordered the payment of ₹1 lakh as compensation for the mental agony suffered by the consumer and ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.

Meanwhile, the authorized Maruti Suzuki dealership from which the vehicle was purchased argued before the Commission that the technical fault in the car was not due to a manufacturing defect but caused by external factors. The dealership claimed that such circumstances did not fall within the scope of the vehicle's warranty.

What was the case?

The complainant, Dr. Premraj Debta, alleged before the Commission that the Maruti Suzuki car he purchased repeatedly developed technical issues. He stated that the vehicle was not performing as expected and, despite multiple complaints, the problem was never permanently resolved. This caused him both financial loss and mental distress.

He reported that the car, purchased in 2024, broke down within just five months. When he took it to the service center, contamination in the petrol was detected. The fuel tank was cleaned, and the car was returned to him, but the same problem recurred later. The service center cleaned it a second time, suggesting that the previous cleaning might not have been thorough.

During this process, a sample of the petrol, which had a curd-like consistency, was tested at a government-recognized laboratory, revealing the presence of ethanol.

Despite these interventions, the vehicle continued to stall repeatedly. Ultimately, they were compelled to file a complaint with the consumer commission.

During the hearing, the vehicle manufacturer and the authorized dealer argued before the commission that the vehicle's malfunction was not due to a manufacturing defect but was caused by external factors. They contended that such a situation did not fall within the scope of the vehicle's warranty; therefore, the company bore no liability for replacement or compensation.

What did the Commission hold?

After examining the available documents, the arguments from both sides, and the records, the commission ruled in favor of granting relief to the complainant. The commission held that mere repair was not an adequate resolution to the dispute. It was observed that if the vehicle provided was not E20-compatible, the consumer should have been informed of this.

Citing a deficiency in service, the commission directed that the vehicle be replaced with a new E20-compatible car of the same model.

The commission further clarified that if the company failed to provide the new car within 45 days, it would be liable to pay a total sum of ₹20.50 lakh, covering the cost of the vehicle. Additionally, the company was ordered to pay ₹1 lakh for mental harassment and ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.

This order comes at a time when E20 petrol is being promoted across the country in a phased manner, and vehicle manufacturers are launching E20-compatible models. The commission specifically directed the provision of a new E20-compatible car. Consequently, this verdict is considered significant in the context of consumer rights and E20 fuel.