Delhi

North East

CC/12/2018

Sh. Harish Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bhartiya E-Rickshaw Center - Opp.Party(s)

20 Feb 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 12/18

 

In the matter of:

		Harish Kumar S/o Chander Pal Singh R/o H.No. J-678, Gali No.2 Kartar Nagar, Delhi-110063.		Complainant
		Versus
	1.                 2.	M/s Bhartiya E- Rickshaw Centre Main Shahdara Chowk, Near Hanuman Mandir, Delhi-110032. Also At: B-437, Shahdara Chowk Near Hanuman Mandir, Delhi-110032.   City Sawera Trading Company A/14/90 village Ramgarh Jahangir Puri Delhi-110033.		Opposite Parties
			DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION      :		15.01.2018 20.02.2020 20.02.2020

 

N.K. Sharma, President

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

ORDER

1. Brief facts in the present complaint are that the complainant had booked City Life XV- 850 model Green and Black colour E-Rickshaw bearing registration No. DL-5E-R-2779 from OP1 on 14.06.2017 on making down payment of booking amount of Rs. 48,000/- against total sale consideration amount of Rs. 1,28,000/-. The said E-Rickshaw was sold to the complainant by OP1 on 18.07.2017 vide invoice No. 022 issued by OP2 for a sum of Rs. 1,00,800/- inclusive of GST. The said rickshaw was taken on finance of Rs. 80,000/-.  However, on taking delivery of the said E-Rickshaw, when the complainant drove it to his residence it stopped midway and the ignition did not start despite several trials and therefore the complainant took the said E-Rickshaw showroom of OP1 on the next day where after inspection by mechanics and manager of OP1, it was suggested to the complainant that due to defective battery the same would be replaced and he was assured that the faults in the said E-Rickshaw are completely removed but there was no improvement in performance in E-Rickshaw and technical defects but OPs refused to solve either. The complainant has further submitted that despite the consideration amount of Rs, 1,28,000/- as mentioned in the booking form No. 589 dated 14.06.2017 received by OPs, he was issued an invoice bill of Rs. 1,00,800/- only by OP2 which is a clear case of their malafide intent. Further OPs also demanded payment of Rs. 3,000/- from the complainant towards police verification. Therefore, when no resolution of his problem was given by either of the OPs, complainant alleging mental agony, harassment and financial losses due to deficiency of service and negligence, was compelled to file the present complaint against OPs praying for issuance of directions against OPs refund the cost of the E-Rickshaw to the tune of Rs. 1,28,000/- (Rs. 1,00800/-+ Rs. 27,200) alongwith compensation of Rs. 50,000/- each for mental harassment and deficiency of service and Rs. 50,000/- toward litigation cost.

Complainant has attached copy of order booking form dated 14.06.2017 issued by OP1, copy of payment receipts issued by OP1 to the complainant for Rs. 1,500/- and Rs. 41,000/-, copy of invoice no. 022 dated 18.07.2017 issued by OP2 for a sum of Rs. 1,00,800/- and copy of legal notice dated 18.12.2017 by complainant’s counsel to the OPs alongwith courier receipts.

2. Notices were issued to the OPs on 29.01.2018. None appeared on behalf of OPs and were therefore proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 08.10.2018.  
3. Complainant filed ex-parte evidence by way of affidavit and exhibited documents relied upon as Ex. CW-1/1 to Ex. CW1/8.
4. Written arguments were filed by the complainant in reassertion and reiteration of their grievance against OPs.   
5.  We have heard the arguments addressed by the counsel of the complainant.  

During the course of oral arguments complainant filed copy of NOC dated 12.09.2018 issued by Pooja Finelease to the concerned RTO with respect to the said E-Rickshaw which he had purchased on hire purchase basis and loan of Rs. 80,000/- was availed by the complainant and paid off.

6. In absence of rebuttal by OPs to the allegation leveled by the complainant against them in the present complaint, we find OPs guilty of deficiency of service in having failed to repair / replace the said defective E-Rickshaw and also of unfair trade practice for having issued an invoice of Rs. 1,00,800/- as against the total consideration received of Rs. 1,27,500/- (Rs. 5,000/+  Rs. 1,500/+ Rs. 41,000/ + Rs. 80,000/-). We therefore allow the present complaint and direct the OPs jointly and severally to refund the cost of E-Rickshaw i.e. Rs. 1,27,500/- to the complainant. We further direct the OPs jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant for mental harassment inclusive of litigation charges.  Le the order be complied with by OPs within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.   
7. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
8.   File be consigned to record room.
9.   Announced on 20.02.2020

(N.K. Sharma)     President

(Sonica Mehrotra)  Member