MR. PRABODHA KUMAR DASH, PRESIDENT:-             

                      This C.C.Case No. 12/2021 taken up today for order. Perused the material on records it reveals that, this C.C.Case file on 08/03/21 & Notice was issued on dt. 16/03/21 & also it was sufficient as per the record the A/D returned on various date, the Ops not appeared after posting the said case 16(Sixteen) times. Taking into fact & circumstances involved in this matter & no step taken by Ops to file their written statement before the Commission, the case disposed off accordingly by setting the Ops ex-parte.

Brief Fact:-

                      The Complainant purchased a E-Vehicle sport-63-43 AH electric chargeable two wheeler on dt. 19/03/2020 from OpNo.1 on payment of Rs. 65,000/-. The Op No.2 who manufactured the same vehicle provided warranty for 12 months as reveals from the warranty card annexed to the records.

                   When the Complainant being used the vehicle for 2 months there was a starting problem and stopped on road, battery discharged fully after 10to 15 Kms running. The Complainant produced the vehicle before Op No.1 as condition stipulated on warranty card for the Op No.1 failed to rectify the defect as well as taken assistance of Op No.2, but all the attempt efforts of Ops gone in vain. Due to the defective product & deficiency of service by both the parties, the Complainant keeping the said vehicle without use & suffered financial loss & mental agony. The Complainant having no alternative remedy available to him has compelled to approach this Honbl’e Commission for redressal of his grievances.

1. The Complainant approached this Commission as a consumer for defective product and deficiency in service as per Sec 2(10) & (11) of C.P.Act,2019. Complainant purchased the disputed vehicle for consideration and attached the money receipt. Hence, he is rightly a consumer within the ambit of C.P.Act,2019.              
2. The C.C.Case has been filed within the limitation period as per the averment of the complaint petition. The vehicle was purchased on dt.19.03.2020 & case was filed on dt. 08/03/2021. The question of limitation for maintainability goes in favour of Complainant.
3. The Complainant alleges product liable by action against the Ops for defective product manufactured by Op No.2 U/S-2(36) and also liability of product seller as well as service provider U/S-2(37) &(38) of C.P.Act,2019.
4. Liability of Product Manufacturer :- As per the C.P.Act,2019, product liability action lies against OpNo.2, who is the manufacturer. The vehicle in question is a battery driven E-Vehicle without fuel of petrol the same is only serviceable by the seller Basudev E-auto Care, Brahmapur, Garadpur, Patkura, Kendrpara, who failed to remove the defect as shown from the records annexed to this C.C.Case on dt. 25.05.2020 for non-functional of the vehicle. The seller acknowledged the manufacturer, authorized dealer deputed mechanic for removal of defect & the said mechanic unable to rectify the same. The same problem also gone in vain on dt. 20.10.20 & 28.10.20. Finally the defective vehicle left on dt. 02.12.20 before OpNo.1 till today for removal of defect as a result, the Complainant is suffering by the arbitrary, illegal and unjust activities during last one and half year.
5. The Ops during pendency of the C.C.Case not filed written statement and not produced mitigating materials on record.

                       Therefore, it is perused that, Ops are well known about the facts against them prays by the Complainant, the issue of expert opinion not necessary in the case in hand because the Ops not contradicted as per the averments in the complaint petition.

                       We have gone through the owner’s manual book  of Tunwal-E-Vehicle Pvt. India Ltd. Run by battery where specification are prescribed and the warranty provided under the said book that, the battery shall be removable within 12 months or 12,000km, which is earlier and also motor had warranty for 12 months or 12,000 Kms which is earlier and also motor had warranty for 12 months and the controller for 6 months, if any defect arose under the warranty shall be free of replacement by the manufacturing Company.The condition stipulated in No.3 of warranty Card, if any defect found on the vehicle, obligation on us only to replace and repair, if any part shown to be defective, with a new equivalent at no cost of the owner during the warranty period. It is crystal clear from the averments made in the complaint petition that, the Complainant faced a starting problem soon after 2 months of purchase of the said vehicle and the Complainant had frequently complained to Op No.1 about the defects, but the said defects couldn’t be removed by Op No.1 & finally the Complainant left the vehicle before Op No.1 on dt. 02.12.2020. The said vehicle kept before Op No.1 idle till today & for which there is no need for the expert opinion regarding the said defect. It was held by Honbl’e National Commission in Tata Motors Ltd. Vs Lachia Setty in 2008(1) CPR,440(NC), wherein it was held that, a new car given trouble which are major defect couldn’t be rectified and removed despite car taken repeatedly to the workshop of dealer, Honbl’e National Commission directed to replace the car with a new car. The case in hand is squarely applicable by the ratio as cited above and therefore in our opinion, Ops are liable to replace the vehicle in question with a new one and also with litigation cost and compensation for mental agony, as per the C.P.Act,2019, both the Ops are liable jointly to replace the vehicle or liable to pay the cost of the vehicle with interest.

                                                                                   O R D E R

                     Under the above facts & circumstances, this Commission taking into consideration all the materials/documents available on record alongwith the affidavit filed by the Complainant. This Commission is hereby directed to the Op No.1 to replace or refund the cost of the vehicle to the Complainant with @9% interest and Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony & Rs. 2,000/- for litigation cost within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which @12% interest P.A. shall be payable to the Complainant till its realization.Further the Op No.1 is at liberty to realise the same from Op No.2 by availing all the legal remedies available as per law. The Complaint petition is allowed and no order as to cost.

                   Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.           

                     Pronounced in the open Court, this the 11th day of July,2022.             

                              I, agree.

                                 Sd/-                                      Sd/-

                           MEMBER                             PRESIDENT