Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The  complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that Opposite Party No.1 is manufacturer and supplier of Hero Electric Vehicles and Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 are dealer of Hero Electric Vehicles Private Limited. The complainant has purchased one Hero Electric Vehicle PV/Photon 72V vide invoice no.80 dated 24.07.2021 from India Autos, 14579, G.T. Road, Dholewal, Ludhiana and made a payment as per price of vehicle i.e.71,440/-. The aforesaid vehicle was also insured for five years with ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. Further alleges that there was three years warranty on battery and charger of the vehicle, as disclosed by the dealer and in case of any default in the battery and charger, the same will be replaced by the company without any costs within period of three years from the date of purchase of the vehicle. In the month of May, 2022 charger and battery of the vehicle has created trouble and vehicle was failed to start. Complainant approached at Ludhiana dealership from where the scooter was purchased. But complainant was shocked when the manager of Ludhiana dealership refused to replace the battery and charger. When the complainant has put some pressure upon the manager, then they suggested complainant that he should visit at Faridkot dealership of Hero Electric and they will definitely replace the battery and charger of the vehicle. Thereafter, the complainant visited the office of the Faridkot dealership and they advised the complainant to bring the battery and charger of the electric vehicle at their office and assured the complainant that they will replace the same within two/three days. So, the complainant has given the battery and charger of the electric vehicle to Faridkot dealership with the hope that same will be replaced. Thereafter, the complainant has made a number of visits at Faridkot dealership of Hero Electric Vehicles, but they did not replace the battery and charger of the vehicle in question. However, in the month of August, 2022 Manager of Faridkot dealership refused to replace the battery and charger of the vehicle. Complainant also served a legal notice dated 04.08.2022 upon the Opposite Parties, but they neither made any payment of useless vehicle nor gave any reply to the notice. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)      Opposite Parties may be directed to get back Hero Electric Vehicles PV/Photon 72V purchased by the complainant vide invoice no.80 dated 24.07.2021 and make the payment of sale price of the vehicle along with interest thereon due to defective battery and charger.

b)       The amount of Rs.60,000/- be allowed to be paid by the opposite parties on account of compensation due to mental tension and harassment and loss of work and for deficient services.

c)      And any other relief to which this Hon’ble Consumer Commission, Moga may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice and equity.       

2.       Upon service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties, hence Opposite Parties were proceeded against exparte. 

3.       In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C6.     

4.       We have heard the Complainant and have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant has purchased one Hero Electric Vehicles PV/Photon 72V vide invoice no.80 dated 24.07.2021 from India Autos, 14579, G.T. Road, Dholewal, Ludhiana and made a payment of Rs.71,440/- as price of vehicle. The aforesaid vehicle was also insured for five years with ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. Further alleges that there was warranty of three years on battery and charger of the vehicle, as disclosed by the dealer and in case of any default in the battery and charger, the same will be replaced by the company without any costs within period of three years from the date of purchase of the vehicle. In the month of May, 2022 charger and battery of the vehicle has created trouble and vehicle was failed to start. Complainant approached at Ludhiana dealership from where the scooter was purchased. But complainant was shocked when the manager at Ludhiana dealership refused to replace the battery and charger. When the complainant has put some pressure upon the manager, then they suggested complainant that he should visit at Faridkot dealership of Hero Electric and they will definitely replace the battery and charger of the vehicle. Thereafter the complainant visited the office of the Faridkot dealership and they advised the complainant to bring the battery and charger of the electric vehicle at their office and assured the complainant that they will replace the same within two/three days. So, the complainant has given the battery and charger of the electric vehicle to Faridkot dealership with the hope that same will be replaced. Thereafter, the complainant has made a number of visits at Faridkot dealership of Hero Electric Vehicles, but they did not replace the battery and charger of the vehicle in question. However, in the month of August, 2022 Manager at Faridkot dealership refused to replace the battery and charger of the vehicle. To corroborate his aforesaid assertion, the Complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C6. The aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted and unchallenged through any cogent and convincing evidence on record as the Opposite Parties did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings.  In this way, the Opposite Parties have impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint.  

6.       So, from the entire unrebutted and unchallenged  evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that  the Opposite Parties have adopted unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by not replacing the battery and charger of the vehicle in question. However the complainant in the prayer clause has prayed that Opposite Parties may be directed to get back Hero Electric Vehicle purchased by the complainant vide invoice no.80 dated 24.07.2021, but on the basis of defect in some parts of vehicle, whole vehicle cannot be ordered to be replaced or amount of the said vehicle refunded.

7.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant against all the Opposite Parties and all the Opposite Parties are jointly or severally directed to replace the defective battery and charger with regard to the vehicle of the complainant i.e. Photon LP (Belge) with new one of the same make and model. The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Parties within 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission.   Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of cost. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.  

Announced in Open Commission.