In Brief
Antonio Paulo Vaz purchased a 2009-model car from Tata Motors' authorized dealer Vista Goa, but was led to believe it was a new 2011 model. Upon discovering the car was old, used (with 622 km on the odometer), and had defects (corrugated undercarriage, scratches), Vaz refused delivery and demanded a refund or replacement. The District Consumer Forum, State Commission, and National Commission all held Tata Motors jointly liable with the dealer for deficiency in service and ordered replacement or refund with interest. The Supreme Court allowed Tata Motors' appeal, holding that without specific pleadings and proof of the manufacturer's knowledge or involvement in the dealer's misrepresentation, and given the principal-to-principal relationship between manufacturer and dealer, the manufacturer could not be held liable. The Court set aside the findings against the manufacturer.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.