A consumer forum in Chennai has ordered
As per the petitioner, he had purchased a car from T Indiran in January 2012, who had bought the car from a dealer of Toyota Motors around two years earlier, with a transferable warranty of 36 months or 1 lakh km.
However, the car would not start just a few days after Sarvanan purchased it, because of which he had to take it for servicing at Lanson Motors. He later found that Indiran had earlier got the car repaired at Harsha Automobiles in Kumananchavadi for 85,000, and had sold it without informing him of the defect.
Sarvanan then requested Lanson Motors to replace the car or refund the cost of repair but was told that he had no locus standi to ask for a new car since the car was secondhand.
Harsha Autombolies, too, said no, claiming that the warranty was void because of owner’s low maintenance, and the fact that it was serviced at a unauthorized centre.
Toyota Kirloskar, however, said that the engine was damaged because of several accidents, and that there was no manufacturing defect in the car.
However, a bench of president K Jayabalan and member T Kalaiyarasi said that the vehicle, which was also tested by Anna University's department of automobile engineering, had several defects. The ignorance on part of Lanson and Harsha motors caused mental agony to Sarvanan.
Therefore, it ordered Toyota Kirloskar and both dealerships to pay 1 lakh as compensation for mental agony, 30,000 for vehicle repairs and 5,000 in costs for litigation.
Image source
