Royal Enfield ordered to pay ₹5 Lakh over defective Continental GT 650 bike

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Coimbatore recently directed Royal Enfield and its authorised dealer, Bharat Automotives, to pay ₹5.1 lakh compensation to a consumer for a defective bike.

A Bench comprising of President P Dakshanamoorthy and Member G Suguna found persistent defects in a Continental GT 650 motorcycle that remained unresolved despite repeated repairs under warranty. It held that such conduct of the manufacturer and dealer amounted to deficiency in service.

Accordingly, the Commission ordered them to jointly pay ₹5 lakh towards mental agony, hardship and incidental expenses, along with ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.

A detailed copy of the order is awaited.

The complainant, Uthresh Gobu, an advocate based in Coimbatore, had purchased the motorcycle in May 2022.

According to the complaint, the bike began exhibiting defects soon after purchase and continued to suffer recurring mechanical and electrical failures. The issues affected multiple components, including the instrument cluster, keyset, suspension system, throttle body, electrical wiring, sensors, exhaust pipes and silencers.

Notably, the instrument cluster had to be replaced six times due to malfunctioning and fogging, while the keyset was replaced three times. Several other parts were also replaced repeatedly at authorised service centres.

Additionally, it was submitted that repeated replacement of the instrument cluster led to inconsistent odometer readings, affecting the resale value of the motorcycle.

Despite these repeated fixes, the defects were never permanently rectified.

Service records showed that the motorcycle was taken to authorised workshops across several cities, including Coimbatore, Pune, Mumbai, Navi Mumbai, Noida, New Delhi and Kullu. The vehicle remained in service centres for a cumulative period exceeding 294 days during the ownership period.

Additionally, the complainant argued that the repeated breakdowns and extended periods of repair caused significant disruption to his professional commitments across cities, in addition to mental distress and recurring expenses.

The complaint also raised concerns regarding the purchase and registration process. It alleged that the dealer, Bharat Automotives, had overcharged for the insurance premium at the time of delivery compared to earlier quotations.

Further, despite submission of correct identity documents, the complainant’s name was incorrectly recorded during registration, resulting in an erroneous spelling in the Registration Certificate (RC).

The complainant relied on job cards, service invoices and correspondence to establish the recurring nature of defects and the prolonged retention of the vehicle.

After examining the material on record, the Commission on May 6, concluded that the repeated failures and inability to rectify defects despite multiple repairs constituted clear deficiency in service.

Accordingly, it granted compensation to the complainant and directed that if the amount is not paid within two months, it will carry interest at 12%.

Advocate R Sivakumar and his team represented the complainant.