NCDRC directs Gurgaon Porsche centre to pay ₹18 lakh compensation to customer for misrepresenting car's year of manufacture

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on Monday ordered a Porsche outlet in Gurgaon to pay ₹18 lakh as compensation to a customer for misrepresenting the year of manufacture of a car sold to him. [Praveen Kumar Mittal v. Porsche India Pvt Ltd and Anr].A coram of Justice Ram Surat Ram Maurya and member Dr Inder Jit Singh observed that Porsche's act of selling a car manufactured in 2013 as one manufactured in 2014 amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, making them liable to compensate the buyer."The act of OP-2 in selling car of 2013 year of manufacture as 2014 year of manufacture amounts to deficiency in service/unfair trade practice, making him liable to compensate the complainant for the same," the order stated..The Commission was hearing a plea against Porsche India and Porsche Center, Gurgaon by one Praveen Kumar Mittal alleging that the latter sold a Cayenne to him for ₹80 lakh after misrepresenting the manufacturing year of the car.He alleged that when in 2016, he decided to resell the car, he found out from the buyer that the car was manufactured in 2013 and not in 2014 as claimed. Therefore, he contended that the respondents illegally and with an intent to cheat him, fabricated documents pertaining to the car. This conduct, according to him, amounted to unfair trade practice and was against consumer rights.Thus, he sought a new car of similar make in lieu of the Cayenne. In the alternative, he sought a refund of the full price of the car along with other expenses incurred by him. He also sought damages of ₹1 crore for acute mental and psychological suffering, unfair trade practices and deficiency in service..According to Porsche Center, the complainant was aware that the car was manufactured in 2013 and was offered a discount due to the same. They produced documents to show that the car was manufactured in 2013. Further, it was claimed that they offered to register the complainant's car for him, but he refused, stating that he would use his contacts in the Regional Transport Office (RTO), Dehradun to have the year of manufacture registered as 2014.Therefore, they contended that the complainant had mala fide intention from the beginning and approached the Commission only after failing to get the manufacturing year changed from 2013 to 2014. .The Commission noted that the sets of documents produced by both the parties not only mentioned different years of manufacture, but also different authorized signatories, indicating that one set was forged.Since the set produced by the complainant was through a public authority under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Commission accepted them as genuine and rejected the set submitted by the respondents..The NCDRC accepted the complainant's submissions and held that the respondents actions amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, making them liable to compensate the complainant for the same.However, since the complainant had used the car in question since purchase, the Commission determined that his prayer for providing a new car of the same make or refund ₹80 lakh plus other costs could not be granted. .It finally ordered the respondents to pay him ₹10 lakh as compensation, along with interest, which amounts to over ₹18 lakh. It also ordered them to pay ₹25,000 as litigation costs to the complainant.The Commission also ordered that the matter of fabricated documents be investigated by the police having jurisdiction of the area to take appropriate action if required..Advocates Vivek Narayan Sharma and Mahima Bhardwaj appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]