Back
AVM J. RAJENDRA
Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Amit Anjani Poddar – Respondent
ORDER
This Order shall decide both the First Appeals arising out from the impugned Order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in CC No.24 of 2017 whereby the State Commission allowed the complaint.
2. As per report of the Registry, there is delay of 44 days in filing the First Appeal No.710 of 2022 and 86 days in filing FA No.928 of 2022. For the reasons stated in the IA Nos.9093 and 11498 of 2022 filed in both the Appeals respectively, the delay is condoned.
3. For Convenience, the parties in the matter are being referred to as mentioned in the Complaint before State Commission. ‘Amit Anjani Poddar’ is the ‘Complainant’. While M/s. Ramani Cars(P) Ltd. is referred to as ‘OP-1 & 2’ and ‘Volkswagen India (P) Ltd.’ is referred as ‘OP-3’. ‘Volkswagen Group Sales India (P) Ltd.’ is referred as ‘OP-4’.
4. Brief facts of the case, as per the Complainant, are that on 03.09.2016 he booked a new Volkswagen Vento Highline Diesel 1.5 AT car for Rs.14,50,000, inclusive of all charges and requested delivery on 08.09.2016. OP-1 informed him that the car was not in stock but could
The court concluded that a purchase made for business promotion does not exclude the purchaser from being classified as a 'consumer', and the allegations of misrepresentation were unsubstantiated.
The court emphasized the importance of evidence in proving delivery of goods in deficiency of service cases.
A complainant must prove manufacturing defect in a vehicle by adequate and admissible evidence supported by an expert opinion to claim total replacement or refund of the purchase price.
(1) Defect – It is well-established that if a defect in goods cannot be determined without proper analysis, an independent expert report is required under Section 13(1)(c) of the Act.(2) Corporate Do....
(1) Commercial Use Admission – A categorical admission of commercial use in the pleadings creates a jurisdictional hurdle. The Commission reaffirmed that whether a party is a “Consumer” must be decid....
The court affirmed that the vehicle was legally repossessed due to the complainant's failure to repay the loan, with no proven defects in the vehicle.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
