The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum observed that the complainant could not derive any pleasure or satisfaction after purchasing the new car "due to imperfections in the car" and "shortcoming of quality checks" by the company.
Relying on the work receipts or job cards placed on record by the complainant, the forum also noted that the engine of the car as well as several other parts had to be changed in the very first year of purchase in 2005.
"The change of engine and so many parts in a new car is never expected. The complainant has failed to derive any pleasure and satisfaction after purchasing a new car, due to numerous imperfections in the car due to shortcoming of quality checks by opposite party (Tata Motors).
"The car at this stage in 2013 cannot be ordered to be replaced. Holding opposite party guilty of gross deficiency, we award a total compensation of Rs one lakh to complainant. We also award a sum of Rs 25,000 towards litigation expenses," a bench presided by C K Chaturvedi said.
The forum also noted that Tata had "simply" opposed the plea of Delhi resident Khalid Hashmi "without explaining how a new car within a year was presented with so many problems".
Hashmi in his complaint had alleged that the car he had bought in July 2004 started having problems right from the start requiring replacement of its engine and several of its parts, despite which the issues persisted.