has said it will challenge a Raipur consumer court order directing it to replace a customer’s Grand Vitara, maintaining that the vehicle was fully E20-compatible and that the issues were caused by contaminated fuel rather than any manufacturing defect.
The statement comes after the Raipur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Additional Bench) partly ruled in favour of a Raipur-based kidney specialist, in what is being seen as India’s first known consumer court order linked to the nationwide rollout of E20 petrol.
The Commission directed Maruti Suzuki and its dealer to replace the complainant’s Grand Vitara Strong Hybrid Zeta Plus, manufactured in January 2023, with a new E20-compatible vehicle of the same variant, or refund the full purchase price within 45 days.
Responding to the order, Maruti Suzuki said the vehicle involved in the case was already E20-compatible, fully capable of running on E20 fuel and that this had been clearly disclosed in the owner’s manual.
The company further said there was evidence of fuel contamination in the sample collected from the customer’s vehicle and claimed that “several other relevant facts” had not been reflected in the Commission’s order. It added that it would challenge the ruling before the appropriate higher forum in accordance with law, while reiterating its commitment to quality, safety and customer satisfaction.
What the Commission said
According to the Commission’s order, the vehicle developed an engine fault after covering around 21,913 km, with the dashboard displaying an engine warning before the car stalled. The complainant alleged that despite repeated fuel changes, fuel-tank cleaning and multiple visits to the authorised workshop, the problem kept recurring.
The Commission observed that Maruti Suzuki and its dealer had failed to adequately clarify whether the specific model sold to the customer supported E20 petrol, which is now the standard fuel available at petrol pumps across the country. It held this amounted to a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
The order also noted that the same fault persisted despite repeated repair attempts and pointed out that the vehicle had been sold as new nearly 17 months after its manufacture.
If the company does not replace the vehicle within 45 days, it has been directed to refund ₹20.5 lakh, comprising the vehicle cost, RTO charges and insurance premium. The Commission also awarded ₹1 lakh as compensation for mental distress and ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.
The ruling is expected to draw wider attention as India continues to expand the use of E20 petrol, with the case raising broader questions around vehicle compatibility, consumer disclosures and after-sales service.