Buying a new car is supposed to bring peace of mind, especially when it comes with a warranty. But for a Delhi man, his ownership experience with an MG ZS Astor turned into a lengthy legal battle that has now ended in his favour.
According to a TOI report, a Delhi consumer court has directed MG Motor India to refund the full cost of the vehicle, worth more than Rs 18 lakh, after finding that the company failed to properly address defects in the car and did not honour its warranty obligations.
The company has also been ordered to pay compensation and legal costs amounting to Rs 4 lakh.
What Was the Dispute Between the Car Owner and MG Motor?
The case was filed by a Delhi resident who purchased an MG ZS Astor in October 2022 for Rs 18,23,228.
The owner claimed that within a few months of purchase, the SUV began showing multiple faults, including problems with the Tyre Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) and the Electronic Steering Column Lock (ESCL).
Despite the vehicle being under warranty, he alleged that he was charged Rs 3,000 for replacing faulty TPMS units.
The dispute escalated in June 2023 during a trip to Gangotri Dham in Uttarakhand.
What Happened During the Uttarakhand Trip?
According to the complaint, the vehicle displayed an ESCL fault warning while being driven in Uttarakhand.
The owner said he contacted MG Motor's customer care and was advised to drive the vehicle to the company's service centre in Dehradun.
However, while travelling towards the workshop, the steering allegedly jammed, resulting in an accident.
The complainant further alleged that a technician arrived only after around 10 hours and that the company never conducted a proper investigation into the root cause of the fault.
What Was MG Motor's Defence?
MG Motor denied knowledge of any steering-related issue and argued that the owner had not allowed a proper inspection of the vehicle.
The company also disputed claims that the SUV suffered from a manufacturing defect.
Meanwhile, dealer MG Motor Gitansh Motors maintained that any manufacturing defect would be the responsibility of the manufacturer and not the dealership.
What Did the Consumer Commission Say?
The commission, comprising President Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar and Member Ashwani Kumar Mehta, was not convinced by the company's arguments.
It noted that emails from MG's Dehradun workshop sought permission only to begin insurance-related repairs and did not indicate any request for the detailed inspection later claimed by the company.
The commission observed: "Mechanical and electronic failures cannot be attributed to driving style of the driver."
It further stated that faults involving the TPMS and ESCL were mechanical and electronic failures for which the driver could not be held responsible.
Why Did the Court Hold MG Motor Liable?
The commission concluded that MG Motor had failed to address the defects in the vehicle and had not fulfilled its warranty and roadside assistance commitments.
In its order, the commission said the company had: "failed not only in addressing the defects in the vehicle... but has also failed to honour the warranty and road side assistance services."
Based on the evidence before it, the commission concluded that the vehicle suffered from manufacturing defects.
What Compensation Has MG Motor Been Ordered to Pay?
The consumer court directed MG Motor India to:
- Refund Rs 18,23,228, the full purchase price of the vehicle.
- Pay 7% annual interest from the date the complaint was filed.
- Pay Rs 4 lakh towards compensation and litigation costs.
- Complete payment within four weeks.
The commission added that if the company fails to comply within the specified period, the amount will attract 9% annual interest until payment is made.
What Will Happen to the Vehicle Now?
The commission noted that the SUV has remained at MG Motor's Dehradun workshop since June 2023 and has been lying there for nearly three years.
Given the length of time involved, it observed that repairing and returning the vehicle was no longer a practical solution.
Instead, the vehicle will remain with MG Motor, which may dispose of it as it deems fit. The owner has been directed to assist in cancelling or transferring the vehicle's registration.
The commission also clarified that MG Motor Gitansh Motors was not liable, as it had no role in the alleged manufacturing defects.
Inputs from TOI
