Devesh Singh
New member
- Model
- TVS JUPITER 125 SMART CONNECT
- Dealer Name
- ARNI TVS
- Company Name
- TVS motors pvt ltd
- Customer Care Number
- 18002587555
- Loss Amount
- 1000
- Ratings
- Opposite Party Address
- Sangeeta Industrial Estate, Gala No., Vasai East – 401208
Respected Sir/Madam,
I respectfully submit this complaint against the above-mentioned TVS Authorized Service Centre for deficiency in service, unfair trade practices, and causing financial loss and mental harassment.
Facts of the Case
On 1 June 2026, I visited the TVS Authorized Service Centre with my TVS Jupiter 125 Disc SX because the vehicle was displaying a CAN Error on the instrument cluster.
The service centre informed me that the issue was due to a defective speedometer/speed sensor and assured me that the required replacement would be carried out.
Based on their assurance, I paid ₹935 through online payment. However, the invoice incorrectly records the payment mode as Cash, which is false and misleading.
After taking delivery of the vehicle, within a few days the same CAN Error appeared again.
Upon inspecting the vehicle, I discovered that the speedometer/component for which I was charged had not actually been replaced, despite the service centre billing me for the replacement.
On 1 July 2026, I revisited the service centre and informed them of the issue. Initially, they stated that they would replace the speedometer later. Subsequently, they informed me that I would have to pay again for the replacement, even though I had already paid earlier.
The conduct of the service centre amounts to:
Charging for parts/services not actually provided.
1. Issuing an incorrect invoice showing the wrong payment mode.
2. Failure to rectify the defect.
3. Unfair trade practice.
4.Deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
5. Causing mental harassment and unnecessary inconvenience.
Grounds of Complaint
The actions of the dealer amount to:
Deficiency in Service.
Unfair Trade Practice.
False Billing.
Misrepresentation.
Financial Loss.
Mental Harassment.
Relief Sought
I respectfully request the Hon'ble Consumer Commission to direct the opposite party to:
Replace the defective speedometer/instrument cluster and rectify the CAN Error without charging any additional amount.
Correct the invoice and issue a revised invoice showing the actual online payment.
Refund the amount if it is established that no replacement was carried out despite charging me.
Pay compensation for the mental harassment, inconvenience, and deficiency in service.
Pay the litigation costs.
Pass any other order deemed fit in the interest of justice.
Documents Attached
Copy of Service Invoice dated 01/06/2026.
Online Payment Proof (UPI Screenshot).
I respectfully submit this complaint against the above-mentioned TVS Authorized Service Centre for deficiency in service, unfair trade practices, and causing financial loss and mental harassment.
Facts of the Case
On 1 June 2026, I visited the TVS Authorized Service Centre with my TVS Jupiter 125 Disc SX because the vehicle was displaying a CAN Error on the instrument cluster.
The service centre informed me that the issue was due to a defective speedometer/speed sensor and assured me that the required replacement would be carried out.
Based on their assurance, I paid ₹935 through online payment. However, the invoice incorrectly records the payment mode as Cash, which is false and misleading.
After taking delivery of the vehicle, within a few days the same CAN Error appeared again.
Upon inspecting the vehicle, I discovered that the speedometer/component for which I was charged had not actually been replaced, despite the service centre billing me for the replacement.
On 1 July 2026, I revisited the service centre and informed them of the issue. Initially, they stated that they would replace the speedometer later. Subsequently, they informed me that I would have to pay again for the replacement, even though I had already paid earlier.
The conduct of the service centre amounts to:
Charging for parts/services not actually provided.
1. Issuing an incorrect invoice showing the wrong payment mode.
2. Failure to rectify the defect.
3. Unfair trade practice.
4.Deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
5. Causing mental harassment and unnecessary inconvenience.
Grounds of Complaint
The actions of the dealer amount to:
Deficiency in Service.
Unfair Trade Practice.
False Billing.
Misrepresentation.
Financial Loss.
Mental Harassment.
Relief Sought
I respectfully request the Hon'ble Consumer Commission to direct the opposite party to:
Replace the defective speedometer/instrument cluster and rectify the CAN Error without charging any additional amount.
Correct the invoice and issue a revised invoice showing the actual online payment.
Refund the amount if it is established that no replacement was carried out despite charging me.
Pay compensation for the mental harassment, inconvenience, and deficiency in service.
Pay the litigation costs.
Pass any other order deemed fit in the interest of justice.
Documents Attached
Copy of Service Invoice dated 01/06/2026.
Online Payment Proof (UPI Screenshot).
