The district Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Chandigarh has directed a Maruti Suzuki dealership to pay Rs 25,000 to a city resident, who received a bailable warrant of Rs 5,000 from a Himachal Pradesh court. The warrant was issued to the resident, Ravinder Kumar Khanna, over a vehicle he had exchanged nearly a decade ago.
The warrant, issued under the Motor Vehicles Act Section 179 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Reckongpeo’s Kinnaur, came as a shock to Khanna and his family, who had no knowledge of its legal implications.
According to Khanna’s complaint, he had exchanged his Maruti 800 for an Alto K10 on December 20, 2015 through CM Auto Sales Pvt Ltd (Maruti Suzuki True Value), Chandigarh.
The dealership later sold the Maruti 800 to Akashdeep Singh of Manimajra on December 26, 2015. However, the vehicle was still registered in Khanna’s name.
Later in March 2019, the vehicle was challaned in Himachal Pradesh, and the challan listed Khanna as the registered owner — leading to the bailable warrant against him.
Following which, Khanna filed a case before the Chandigarh Consumer Commission, alleging gross negligence on part of the dealership.
Maruti Suzuki India (Regional Office, Chandigarh) argued that it was not involved in the exchange transaction and therefore could not be held responsible.
Story continues below this ad
The dealership, meanwhile, claimed it had handed over all relevant documents to the subsequent buyer and had even issued a legal notice when the buyer failed to transfer ownership.
However, the Commission rejected the dealership’s defence, saying that once the vehicle was entrusted to the dealership, it became their sole responsibility to ensure its transfer to the new owner. The Commission also noted that records clearly showed the vehicle was being driven on the road long after being handed over to the dealership, while it remained registered in Khanna’s name — an evident deficiency in service.
The dealership also informed the Commission that the vehicle had since been scrapped. The Commission said that because the vehicle no longer existed, no direction regarding ownership transfer could be issued.
While dismissing the complaint against Maruti Suzuki India, the Commission ordered the dealership to pay Khanna Rs 25,000 as compensation for harassment and litigation expenses.
