When a product that you buy turns out to be defective, you obviously hold not only the manufacturer, but also the dealer from whom you purchased the product, liable. However, dealers invariably try to escape responsibility by pointing a finger at the manufacturer. And they have often challenged court decisions holding them as much liable as the manufacturer for a defective product.

This issue of dealer’s liability came up yet again some months ago before the apex consumer court, when a dealer challenged the decision of the lower consumer courts asking him as well as the manufacturer to pay for a defective power tiller purchased by a consumer, Abdul Karim. A farmer, Karim mortgaged his land, secured a loan of Rs 70,000 from the Mushirabad branch of State Bank of India and bought a tiller for Rs 80,000. However, it developed some snags and despite several attempts, could not be repaired, forcing the farmer to eventually seek the help of the consumer court for relief.

The consumer forum in Mushirabad directed the dealer and the manufacturer to refund the cost of the tiller after deducting 10 per cent towards depreciation. When the state commission also concurred with this view, the dealer filed a revision petition before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. And in support of his contention, he quoted an order of the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Motors Ltd vs N. Sivakumar, wherein it was held that only the manufacturer of the vehicle was liable for the defects, and not the dealer.

Dismissing this contention, the National Commission quoted a more recent judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Philip Mampillil vs Premier Automobiles Ltd, wherein the court had made it clear that the dealer or the agent would be as liable as the manufacturer. In addition to this judgement, the apex consumer court also took into consideration, the provisions of Section 226 of the Contract Act, and concluded that since the purchase of the tiller was made through the dealer, the privity of contract was with him. So, it was incorrect to say that the agent or the dealer was not jointly and severally liable for the defects in the tiller, the Commission said. (Ashoke Khan vs Abdul Karim, RP no 1383 of 2003).

So, whenever you file a complaint about a defective product, remember to name both the retailer and the manufacturer. That would ensure that both will take responsibility for defective goods.