BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 647 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 14.11.2019
Date of Decision : 28.02.2024
Sheela aged about 35 years wife of Shri Dhiraj Kumar, resident of village Goriwala Sub Tehsil Goriwala, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
Green Power, Sirsa Road Ellenabad, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa through its authorized person/ authorized signatory.
..…Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA …………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. K.R. Taak, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Ganesh Sethi, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER:-
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (after amendment u/s 35 of C.P. Act, 2019) against the opposite party (hereinafter referred as OP).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that on 27.07.2018 complainant purchased an electric scooty make Green Power from op with guarantee/ warranty of three years for motor and one year for battery. That just after one month of its purchase, the said scooty started creating problem in its running and upon approaching to the op, the op disclosed that there is defect in the battery of scooty and assured him that same will be replaced within a short period and thereafter there will be no problem to the complainant. It is further averred that soon thereafter the op sent a battery to the complainant but the same was already expired and again approaching to the op, he stated that new batteries shall be provided to him within few days but the op failed to redress the grievance of complainant and as such complainant had to make rounds to the op time and again. Now op has flatly refused to admit his claim. It is further averred that it seems that op has sold out defected vehicle to him and has charged amount of new vehicle and this act on the part of op clearly amounts to cheating with complainant also amounts to breach of faith, hence complainant is legally entitled to refund of the total amount spent on vehicle alongwith interest and also reserves his right for initiating criminal proceedings against the op. That due to act and conduct of op, the complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment and same also amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The complainant also got served a legal notice to the op on 16.08.2019 but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, op appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability, complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties i.e. manufacturing company, cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. It is submitted that no such assurances regarding alleged warranty of three years of motor and one year warranty of batteries were given to the complainant by the op at any point of time. Rather it was told to her that the batteries have only six months guarantee plus six months warranty which is clearly mentioned on the label affixed on the batteries and this fact is very well in the knowledge of complainant. The batteries as well as motor of the vehicle are out of guarantee and even warranty period. It is further submitted that complainant has not mentioned the specific date and month that when the problem occurred in the batteries/ motor and when the defect was detected and when she visited the premises of op in the matter. In fact, the complainant never visited/ approached to the op at any point of time except the legal notice served by her which is also after expiry of guarantee/ warranty period as scooty was purchased by him on 27.07.2018 and legal notice was served on 16.08.2019, thus the batteries have become out of guarantee and warranty period. It is submitted that firstly the op was informed regarding alleged defect in the batteries and motor of vehicle through legal notice only. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered her affidavit Ex.C1, invoice Ex.C2, legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipt Ex.C4 and delivery report Ex.C5.
5. On the other hand, op has tendered affidavit of Sh. Pawan Kumar Proprietor as Ex. RW1/A.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
7. From the invoice Ex.C2, it is evident that on 27.07.2018 complainant purchased the electric Scooty from op for a sum of Rs.35,000/- and three years warranty for motor and one year warranty for charger, battery etc. was given to the complainant. The complainant is alleging defect in the battery of the scooty after expiry of warranty period of one year of battery as complainant got served legal notice to the op on 16.08.2019 i.e. after one year of purchase of scooty in question. Except legal notice dated 16.08.2019 there is nothing on file to prove the fact that defect in the battery in question occurred within warranty period or that complainant made any complaint to the op within warranty period of one year. So, the op has rightly pleaded that since the batteries became out of guarantee and warranty, so as per terms and conditions of the company, same cannot be replaced and op is just dealer whereas manufacturing company has also not been impleaded as a party. So, it is proved on record that complainant has alleged defect in the batteries of the scooty only after expiry of warranty period of one year as there is nothing on file to prove the version of complainant that prior to it also he made any complaint to the op and as such complaint deserves dismissal.
8. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. 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. 28.02.2024. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sirsa
