BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.              

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 261 of 2023.                                                                       

                                                          Date of Institution :    26.06.2023.

                                                          Date of Decision   :    11.10.2024.

Gurdeep Singh Chahal, aged 55 years son of Shri Hamir Singh, resident of Gali No.4, Court Colony, Sirsa, District Sirsa. Mobile No. 94161-47021.

                                ……Complainant.

                             Versus.

1. Bhupendra Auto Electronics, Behind Indane Gas Office Street under Railway Bridge authorized Amaron Battery.

2. Shreyans Auto, 64, Auto Market Sirsa through its Proprietor Sirsa. Mobile No. 98134-88333.

...…Opposite parties.

            Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Before:       SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT                                 

                       MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………….MEMBER.

                    SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA …………………MEMBER

Present:       Sh. B.S. Chahal, Advocate for complainant.

                   Opposite parties already exparte.                                                                 

ORDER

                   In brief, the case of complainant is that on 21.09.2021 complainant has purchased a battery of the motor cycle from op no.1 bearing serial No. BACO231V521168 for an amount of Rs.1500/-  after depositing old battery with guarantee of replacement for two years as well as warranty for 48 months. On 02.06.2023 the above said battery became out of order and his bike stop working. Then complainant contacted to op no.1 and op no.1 after formally checking told the complainant that battery is out of order and he will send the same to its main dealer for replacement i.e. op no.2 and op no.1 sent the said battery to op no.2. It is further averred that op no.1 returned the same to the complainant on 15.06.2023 with the remarks of op no.2 that battery is in a damage condition and cannot be replaced whereas battery box is in good condition till today. The op no.2 also gave a slip in which in first column it is mentioned/ tick marked that battery is OK but in serial no.2 in model column it is mentioned that same is damaged and in this manner the ops refused to admit his claim and have caused harassment and mental agony and have also violated the service norms. Hence, this complaint.     

2.                Notice of the complaint was issued to the ops but ops despite service of notices did not appear and as none appeared on their behalf, as such ops were proceeded against exparte.

3.                The complainant in exparte evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C2.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have gone through the case file.

5.                From the warranty card Ex.C1, it is evident that on 21.09.2021 complainant purchased one Amaron battery from op no.1 for his motor cycle. According to complainant old battery was replaced with the said new battery after paying an amount of Rs.1500/- and op no.1 gave guarantee of replacement for two years as well as warranty for 48 months. It is further case of complainant that on 02.06.2023, the above said new battery became out of order and his motor cycle stopped working but ops returned the said battery to the complainant on 15.06.2023 with the remarks that battery is in damaged condition which is wrong and illegal and in this regard complainant has also placed on file challan of op no.2 as Ex.C2. However, both the ops despite notices have failed to appear before the Commission and opted to be proceeded against exparte. The pleadings as well as evidence of complainant remained unchallenged and unrebutted. There is nothing on file to prove the fact that battery was in damaged condition when it was handed over by complainant to the ops. The complainant for such a petty matter has to file the present complaint as ops have failed to redress the grievance of complainant despite the fact that battery in question was within guarantee/ warranty period. So, the complainant is entitled to replacement of defective battery with new one.

6.                In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to replace the defective battery with new one of same make, model and price without charging anything from complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. We also direct the ops to further pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period, failing which complainant will be entitled to said amount of Rs.2000/- alongwith interest at the rate of @6% per annum from this order till actual realization besides new battery. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.  

Announced.                   Member                Member                    President

Dt. 11.10.2024.                                                                   District Consumer Disputes                                                                                  

                                                                                          Redressal Commission, Sirsa.