Archive · 8 Sep 2026
Luxury SUV Audio Dispute Ends With Rs 1.5 Lakh Payout
A company bought an expensive luxury SUV in 2019.
Soon after receiving it, the company said the audio system was not working properly and that a door had a problem.
The vehicle was taken to a workshop, and parts of the audio system were replaced under warranty.
The company still said the problem had not been properly fixed and asked for a replacement or refund.
The dealer said there was no major manufacturing defect and that the car was ready after repairs.
A consumer commission said the audio complaint was real enough to show poor after-sales service.
However, it said there was not enough evidence that the whole vehicle was defective.
The commission ordered a total payment of Rs 1.5 lakh and allowed one final audio inspection.
It did not order the dealer to replace the SUV or refund its price.
Zeniak Innovation India Limited bought a Rs 53.72 lakh luxury SUV delivered on August 5, 2019.
The buyer reported an audio-system malfunction and a front-door problem within days of delivery.
Lexus Motors Limited denied an inherent manufacturing defect but acknowledged the audio complaint and warranty repairs.
The West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission found deficient after-sales service but not a defect affecting the entire vehicle.
The commission awarded Rs 1 lakh compensation and Rs 50,000 litigation costs, rejecting replacement, refund and additional damages.
- Who
- Zeniak Innovation India Limited complained against Lexus Motors Limited and Lexus Motors Limited (Workshop).
- What
- The West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission awarded Rs 1.5 lakh for deficient after-sales service over an SUV's audio problem.
- When
- The SUV was purchased on March 31, 2019, delivered on August 5, 2019, and the commission issued its decision on September 3.
- Where
- The case was decided by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
- Why
- The commission found that the admitted audio complaint was not closed with clear diagnostic confirmation, but found insufficient evidence of an inherent defect in the entire vehicle.
Buyer's Position
Dealer's Position
Audio-system problem
Buyer's Position
The buyer said repeated inspections and repairs did not satisfactorily resolve the audio malfunction.
Dealer's Position
The dealer denied a manufacturing defect and said the necessary audio parts or system had been replaced free of cost under warranty.
Requested remedy
Buyer's Position
The buyer sought replacement of the SUV or a refund, along with damages.
Dealer's Position
The dealer maintained that the vehicle was ready for delivery after the warranty work.
Extent of the defect
Buyer's Position
The buyer's complaint included an audio problem and a front-door issue that appeared soon after delivery.
Dealer's Position
The commission found evidence of a component-level audio issue but no proof that the entire vehicle had an inherent or systemic manufacturing defect.
- Vehicle price
- Rs 53.72 lakh
- Purchase date
- March 31, 2019
- Delivery date
- August 5, 2019
- Reported problems
- Audio-system malfunction and an allegedly faulty front door
- Compensation
- Rs 1 lakh for deficient after-sales service
- Litigation costs
- Rs 50,000
- Payment deadline
- Within 45 days, with 9% annual simple interest after default