Failure To Issue Tax Invoice For Extended Warranty, Hyderabad District Commission Holds Volkswagen's Dealer Liable For Unfair Trade Practice
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising B. Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi (President) and Lakshmi Prasanna (Member) held an authorized dealer of Volkswagen India liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failing to issue the tax invoice/bill for the extended warranty benefits accrued to the Complainant....
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Hyderabad (Telangana) bench comprising B. Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi (President) and Lakshmi Prasanna (Member) held an authorized dealer of Volkswagen India liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for failing to issue the tax invoice/bill for the extended warranty benefits accrued to the Complainant. The bench directed it to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the Complainant.
Brief Facts:
Mrs Aarti Baldwa (“Complainant”) purchased a Volkswagen Taigun vehicle from an authorized dealer, P.P.S Motors Private Limited (“Dealer”) by paying Rs. 16,71,031/-. However, when the Complainant saw the bill, he noticed that he was additionally charged with Rs. 29,157/-. Subsequently, upon inquiry at the dealer, the Complainant was presented with bills for Rs. 14,998/- towards alloy wheel painting and a separate bill of Rs. 14,159/- for the extended warranty of the vehicle. Notably, the receipts for these charges were generated six days after the delivery of the vehicle to the Complainant. This raised concerns about the timing and legitimacy of these charges. The Complainant approached the dealer on multiple occasions but didn't receive a satisfactory response. Thereafter, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission – I, Hyderabad, Telangana (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the dealer.
The dealer didn't appear before the District Commission. Therefore, it proceeded against ex-parte.
Observations by the Commission:
After assessing the evidence on record, the District Commission noted that the Complainant failed to establish that the extra charged amount was not on her demand. However, the dealer also failed to give the tax invoice of the 'extended warranty' to the Complainant at the time of vehicle delivery or otherwise. Thus, the non-issuance of a bill/cash receipt, for the extended warranty, amounted to unfair trade practice under Section 2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Further, the District Commission held that since the dealer didn't appear before it, the contentions raised by the Complainant were largely unchallenged. Therefore, the District Commission held the dealer liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. The District Commission directed the dealer to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to the Complainant.