Sangareddy panel rejects ₹13.88-lakh Tata Motors refund claim
SANGAREDDY: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Medak at Sangareddy on June 20, 2025, dismissed a consumer complaint by Ms Dudekula Hamida seeking a refund of the on-road price of her Tata Nexon and damages, finding no deficiency of service or proven manufacturing defect.
The commission record shows the complainant purchased the petrol automatic Nexon XZA+ on September 30, 2021, at an on-road price of ₹13,88,669 and reported recurring issues including steering vibration, dashboard warning lights, and an engine shutdown on a highway journey in June 2023. The vehicle was financed by Bank of Baroda. (Filed: October 28, 2023; disposed: June 20, 2025.)
Service history, repairs and satisfaction note
Service records produced by the manufacturer and dealer indicate multiple service visits: first free service on November 26, 2021 (steering vibration resolved), routine services on June 14, 2022 and December 29, 2022, and a breakdown visit on June 14, 2023 when the workshop replaced the engine assembly, clutch and vacuum pump assembly under warranty. The complainant signed a satisfaction note dated July 31, 2023 saying the vehicle “so far looks in good shape”. Those documents were marked and relied on by the opposite parties.
Manufacturer’s defence and legal reasoning
Tata Motors (as opposed to the dealer) argued that the passenger-vehicle undertaking was transferred to Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles Limited with effect from January 1, 2022, and submitted that all repairs were carried out under warranty. The manufacturer denied any inherent manufacturing defect, submitted that the repairs were routine and usage-related, and emphasised the absence of an independent expert report or laboratory test proving an inherent defect. The commission accepted those submissions.
Commission’s conclusion and relief
Applying settled law that replacement or refund is not to be ordered for rectifiable defects addressed under warranty, and noting the absence of expert technical evidence from the complainant, the commission held there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice by the opposite parties. The complaint was dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of job cards, tax invoices and the satisfaction note (Ex.B3–Ex.B7) were part of the opposite parties’ evidence.
Verification of place and forum
The commission is the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission for Medak sitting at Sangareddy (the forum is commonly described as “Medak at Sangareddy”). Tellapur the complainant’s address is in Ramachandrapuram mandal, Sangareddy district, PIN 502032.
