Woman’s truck for livelihood ‘constantly broke down’, she wins free repairs, Rs 25,000

The Punjab Consumer Commission was hearing a woman's complaint alleging that a truck bought to support her family's livelihood developed repeated defects despite multiple repairs.

Woman Truck Driver Punjab Consumer Commission LivelihoodThe commission said failure to remove the truck's defects despite repeated repairs amounted to deficiency in service. (Image generated using AI)

A Punjab consumer commission has ordered the manufacturer and authorised dealer of a BharatBenz truck to repair it free of cost and pay a woman Rs 25,000 after she spent months taking the vehicle to workshops over repeated mechanical problems instead of using it to earn a living for her family.

The Gurdaspur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission president Lalit Mohan Dogra and member Bhagwan Singh Matharu were hearing Lakhbir Kaur’s complaint against Daimler India Commercial Vehicles Private Limited and its authorised dealer over alleged defects in a truck bought to earn her family’s livelihood, including whether her consumer complaint was maintainable.

“The opposite parties are claiming itself to be very reputed and High Technology Company but failure to remove the defects as claimed by the complainant definitely amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties,” the commission said on July 2.

Lakhbir Kaur bought the BharatBenz truck on February 24, 2023, for Rs 25.25 to support her family’s livelihood. She paid Rs 16.50 lakh upfront, financed the balance through a loan, and spent another Rs 3.50 lakh on building the truck body before putting it on the road.

First long trip

According to the complaint, the truck started developing problems soon after it hit the road in May 2023. On its first trip to Bhopal, it allegedly consumed excessive AdBlue and its mileage dropped from around seven kilometres per litre to nearly 3.5 kilometres per litre. The complainant said a software update failed to fix the issue.

She alleged the truck continued to develop faults, with the engine nozzle, pump and air-conditioning compressor replaced under warranty, besides recurring problems with the Urea pump, dashboard wiring, cabin fittings and vibrations that forced repeated workshop visits.

The truck allegedly broke down again in November 2023, leading to cancellation of a transport consignment and a loss of around Rs 60,000. After serving a legal notice, she approached the consumer commission seeking replacement of the truck, repairs and compensation.

Story continues below this ad

Manufacturer denied manufacturing defect

Daimler India Commercial Vehicles and the dealer contested the complaint, arguing that the truck did not suffer from any manufacturing defect. They submitted that the vehicle had passed stringent quality checks before sale and had covered over 95,000 kilometres, which, according to them, demonstrated that it was roadworthy.

The opposite parties also argued that fuel consumption depends on several factors, including road conditions, driving style, vehicle load and maintenance. They maintained that all warranty claims had been attended to whenever the truck was brought to their workshops and that the complainant had failed to produce expert evidence establishing a manufacturing defect.

They also contended that the vehicle had been purchased for commercial purposes and therefore the complaint was not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act.

Commission rejects maintainability objection

  • The commission rejected the manufacturer’s objection that the complaint was not maintainable, holding that there was no evidence Lakhbir Kaur operated a commercial fleet and accepting that the truck was purchased to earn the family’s livelihood.
  • During the proceedings, experts from Sardar Beant Singh State University, Gurdaspur, said they lacked the specialised facilities to conduct a detailed technical examination.
  • After a proposed inspection by an Ashok Leyland service centre also failed because it lacked compatible diagnostic tools for BharatBenz vehicles, the commission appointed a local commissioner.
  • The local commissioner found radiator blockage, engine oil leakage, overheating, excessive vibrations, dashboard warning lights and multiple AdBlue system and sensor faults, concluding that repeated repairs had failed and major component replacements were necessary.
  • Accepting the report, the commission noted that although the manufacturer questioned its findings, it never offered to have the truck independently examined by its own engineers.

The commission held that the unresolved defects despite repeated repairs amounted to a deficiency in service. It directed Daimler India Commercial Vehicles Private Limited and its authorised dealer to replace the necessary parts and repair defects, including engine overheating, radiator, front axle, dashboard, sensor and excessive AdBlue consumption issues, free of cost.

Story continues below this ad

It also awarded Lakhbir Kaur Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental harassment and Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses, directing compliance within 45 days, but declined to order replacement of the truck.

Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express (Digital), where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system. Expertise Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including: Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability. Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters. Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights. Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More

 

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments