4 min readNew DelhiSep 4, 2026 06:30 PM IST
First published on: Sep 4, 2026 at 06:30 PM IST
The Gurugram District Consumer Commission has directed a car manufacturer and its dealer to replace a defective infotainment unit in a customer’s ‘top- variant’ model vehicle, finding a severe deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
A bench of president Sanjeev Jindal and members Jyoti Siwach and Khushwinder Kaur also awarded Rs 30,000 compensation for mental harassment and Rs 11,000 towards litigation expenses.
“The submissions made by the complainant stand proved, completely and conclusively, in crystal-clear terms, from the accurate, brief, and concise documentary evidence placed on the record of this file by the complainant in the form of his affidavit, where he has reiterated the averments made in his complaint, coupled with certain other documents,” the commission said on August 17.
The commission noted that there did occur a severe deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, which also amounted to adopting an unfair trade practice.
Car’s infotainment system repeatedly malfunctioned
The complainant purchased a top-end variant model car of a leading automobile company on November 21, 2018, for Rs 10.86. The vehicle was covered by a standard two-year warranty and a three-year extended warranty.
According to the complainant, soon after purchase, its Smartphone Linkage Display Audio (SLDA) unit began malfunctioning, affecting GPS navigation, voice commands, and steering-mounted controls. He claimed that the voice command feature of the subject vehicle never worked, the GPS navigation system was useless, and half of the steering wheel buttons never worked.
Despite software updates and repeated complaints, the problems persisted. The complainant sought replacement of the SLDA unit under warranty, but his requests remained unresolved. He subsequently approached the consumer commission, alleging deficiency in service.
The commission noted that the opposite party failed to place on record evidence challenging his claims or proving anything contrary to them. One of the service-centre parties was also proceeded against ex parte.
Manufacturer, dealer jointly liable: Order
The commission found that the complainant’s allegations regarding the defective SLDA unit were fully and conclusively proved through his affidavit and supporting documentary evidence, including WhatsApp conversations, videos, job cards and the legal notice.
It observed that the opposite parties had failed to produce any evidence to rebut the complainant’s allegations or establish anything contrary to his claims. Consequently, his version remained unrebutted.
The commission held that there was a severe deficiency in service, which also amounted to an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.
It accordingly directed the manufacturer and dealer to replace the faulty SLDA unit with a brand-new unit under warranty and ensure that all connected features functioned properly.
Takeaway
This order reinforces that repeated failure of a vehicle’s essential features, despite warranty coverage and multiple service attempts, can amount to severe deficiency and unfair trade practice. The ruling also underscores that consumers can seek both rectification of defective components and compensation for mental harassment and litigation expenses.
Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Haryana helpline: 1800-180-2087) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.
Do not miss out on these stories:
Fix or give money back: Consumer body warns car dealer over faulty engine
Rs 1.57 crore SUV ‘fails’ within weeks, buyer wins replacement, Rs 2.2 lakh payout
West Bengal cops seize used car over ‘forged’ documents, buyer wins Rs 4.25 lakh payout
The district consumer commission was dealing with a plea of a man regarding defect in his newly purchased car. (AI-generated Image) 
Share
