STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No. 715 of 2023 Date of institution : 25.10.2023 Reserved on : 05.06.2025 Date of Decision : 02.07.2025 Maruti Suzuki India Limited, 1 Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi through its Authorized Representative.

….Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 Versus

1. Vikas Verma S/o Varinder Kumar, resident of Ward No.10, Majestic Road, Shanti Nagar, Moga, Tehsil & District Moga.

.…Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. Remira Motors Private Limited, through Authorized Representative Brar Complex, GT Road, Moga.

…Respondent No.2/Opposite Party No.1 First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 28.08.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Moga in CC No.27 of 2023.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Yes/No Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Sahil Abhi, Advocate for Sh. Salil Sabhlok, Advocate For respondent No.1 : Sh.Abhinav Jain, Advocate For respondent No.2 : Sh. H.S. Sandhu, Advocate SIMARJOT KAUR, MEMBER :

The Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 i.e. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, has filed the present Appeal through its Authorized Representative to challenge the impugned order dated 28.08.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Moga (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent No.1/Complainant-Vikas Verma had been partly allowed

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Respondent/Complainant-Vikas Verma in the Complaint filed before the District Commission are that he had purchased Maruti Brezza Smart Hybrid ZXi Car from OP No.1 on 04.11.2022. He had paid an amount of Rs.10,97,305/- as sale consideration. Said car was having Registration No. PB-29AF-3003. It was insured with The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Maruti Suzuki Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. was the Agent of the said Insurance Policy. On 24.01.2023 when the Complainant was driving the Car and his brother Rahul Verma was sitting beside him, at about 7.30 pm when they reached in front of old Toyota Agency situated at Moga-Ludhiana GT Road, Moga, suddenly his vehicle collided with the stray cow. The impact was such the cow died on the spot. Inspite of the fact that both the passengers were wearing seat belts still the car was damaged badly in the accident. Surprisingly, despite such huge damage the Air Bags of the Car did not open. DDR in this regard was lodged with the Police. The OP No.1 had wrongly given false assurances regarding the safety features of the said vehicle. He took his Car to OP No.1-Workshop for repairs and also asked them to examine why the Air Bags did not open inspite of a heavy impact. Due to non-opening of the Air Bags, the Complainant and his brother suffered injuries in the accident. Therefore, non-opening of the airbags was manufacturing defect in the product of the Company.

4. Stating the act of the opposite parties to be a case of ‘deficiency in service’ and ‘unfair trade practice’, it was prayed in the Complaint that the OPs be directed to give new Car i.e. Maruti Brezza Smart Hybrid SXI Model, as the product in question has a manufacturing defect or refund the price of the Car i.e. Rs.10,97,305. Further directed to pay insurance amount of Rs.31,938/- and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of ‘deficiency in service’, ‘unfair trade practice’ and harassment suffered at the hands of the OPs and to pay an amount for Rs.55,000/- as litigation expenses.

5. Upon issuance of notice in the Complaint, the Opposite Parties had appeared and filed their separate writt