1 hr ago
Hyderabad Firm Wins Payout After Electric SUV Breakdowns
A Hyderabad business bought a new electric SUV for daily travel.
Soon after buying it, the vehicle sometimes would not start.
Its smart key and door-locking system also stopped working repeatedly.
The business said the SUV even stopped while it was being driven.
The dealer said it had repaired the problems and that no manufacturing defect had been proven.
However, service records showed that some complaints continued after several visits.
The consumer commission decided that the vehicle was defective and that the dealer had provided poor service.
It ordered the dealer to pay about Rs 24.63 lakh in total.
A Hyderabad business bought a premium electric SUV for Rs 27.98 lakh on August 1, 2025.
The vehicle allegedly repeatedly failed to start and developed smart-key and central-locking problems.
Service records showed complaints continuing through December 2025 and February of the following year.
The dealer argued that no manufacturing defect was proven and said reported issues had been addressed.
The Hyderabad District Consumer Commission ordered a refund, compensation and costs totaling Rs 24.63 lakh.
- Who
- A Hyderabad business and the authorised dealer of the electric SUV.
- What
- The Hyderabad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I ordered a refund, compensation and costs after finding a deficiency in service and delivery of a defective vehicle.
- Where
- Hyderabad, Telangana.
- When
- The SUV was purchased on August 1, 2025; the commission hearing was reported as taking place on September 7, with service records continuing into February of the following year.
- Why
- The vehicle allegedly suffered repeated starting, smart-key, central-locking and other problems despite service visits.
Consumer's case
Dealer's response
Repeated defects
Consumer's case
The business said the new SUV repeatedly failed to start, lost smart-key recognition, suffered central-locking failures and stopped mid-journey despite service visits.
Dealer's response
The dealer said it responded whenever an issue was reported, that the software problem required an update and had been resolved, and that the locking issue was addressed by replacing a component under warranty.
Proof of defect
Consumer's case
The consumer relied on repeated complaints and service records, including later records showing continuing locking, starting, drive-mode and interior-light problems.
Dealer's response
The dealer argued that no manufacturing defect had been established because the consumer had not submitted an expert, automobile-engineer or laboratory report.
Responsibility for the claim
Consumer's case
The consumer sought relief from the dealer after the SUV remained unreliable and requested replacement or a refund.
Dealer's response
The dealer argued that it was only an authorised dealer and service centre and that the vehicle manufacturer had not been made a party to the complaint.
Key facts
- Vehicle price
- Rs 27.98 lakh
- Purchase date
- August 1, 2025
- Refund ordered
- Around Rs 23.98 lakh, calculated after a 10% depreciation deduction
- Compensation
- Rs 50,000
- Litigation costs
- Rs 15,000
- Total payout
- Rs 24.63 lakh
- Commission
- Hyderabad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I
Quotes
Hyderabad District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I
Consumer forum comprising President B Uma Venkata Subba Lakshmi and members C Lakshmi Prasanna and B Raji Reddy
“The service history/job card submitted by the opposite party and the complainant establishes that the reported issues of smart key out-of-range issue and the central locking system malfunction persist even after filing the consumer complaint and the vehicle of the complainant has stopped mid-way.”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
Luxury SUV Audio Dispute Ends With Rs 1.5 Lakh Payout
Ola Electric Ordered to Refund Kurnool Consumer With 12% Interest
Haryana Man Wins Rs 41,000 Over Defective Car Infotainment
Disabled Kerala Couple Wins Scooter Replacement Order Against TVS
Kia India Dealer Ordered Refund Over Recurring Sonet DPF Problem
Advocate Wins Rs 55,500 Payout in Defective Phone Warranty Case
Kerala Hospital Ordered to Pay Patient Rs 1.14 Lakh
India Tightens Online Shopping Rules On Discounts And Fees
Centre Amends E-Commerce Rules to Curb Dark Patterns
India Tightens E-Commerce Rules on Prices, Search and Transparency
