Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/176/2017

John Singh S/o.Mr.Andrews Rep by his Power of Attorney Agent - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Romai Electrical vetricless P LTD,M/s.JHL Trading Limited - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Vasudevan

13 Nov 2018

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  07.11.2017

                                                                Order pronounced on:  13.11.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT:  TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL PRESIDENT

 

THIRU.D. BABU VARADHARAJAN B.Sc., B.L., :   MEMBER – I

 

TUESDAY  THE 13^th   DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018

 

C.C.NO.176/2017

 

John Singh,

S/o Mr.Andrews,

Rep. By his Power of Attorney Agent,

Mr.Andrews.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.The Manager,

M/s. Romai Electrical Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.,

Kakkan Colony, Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 034.

 

2.M/s.JHL Trading Limited Liability,

Partnership,

No.151/200, Kakkan Colony,

K.H.Road, Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 034.

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 04.12.2017

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.U.Vasudevan & S.Jayakumar

 

Counsel for Opposite Parties                   : Ex – parte (on 05.01.2018)

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL

This complaint is filed by the complainant to direct the opposite parties to pay 1,00,000/-towards compensation for causing hardship and mental agony  and to replace the Battery of the vehicle with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The first opposite party through the second opposite party has approached the complainant with false representation, assurances and induced him to purchase  an Electric scooter in the month of July 2016 by paying the initial amount of Rs.15,000/-. It is black in colour, 60 V Battery Run Scooter. The rest of the amount of  Rs.28,000/- was paid in EMI basis and the receipt for the paid total amount was given by the opposite parties. At the time of oral contract entered into between the parties, the opposite parties have promised to the complainant that there exists fourteen months guarantee for the Battery.  In the second week of June 2017, The scooter came to a standstill and did not start up. The complainant approached the 2^nd opposite party for service and he has not bothered about the same. After a long time, the second opposite party had sent a service Mechanic and he suggested for replacement of Battery. When it was questioned by the complainant to the opposite parties, they have demanded Rs.9,000/- for  doing service even within  the warranty period. The Vehicle purchased was lying useless.  Being service provider the opposite parties are guilty of unfair trade practice. The Complainant is put to lot of mental agony and stress due to  unprofessional  attitude and  deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and are liable to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation towards the mental agony   and physical strain apart from  changing the battery at their cost.    

2. The opposite parties are called absent and they were set ex - parte.     

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

4. POINT NO :1

          The complainant purchased an Electric Scooter in the month of July 2016  by paying the initial payment of Rs.15,000/- and then Rs.28,000/- was paid  through EMI and Valid receipt of Ex.A1 is given by the opposite parties. Warranty  card is Ex.A2. Service complaint of Battery issue was given in Ex.A3. Legal notice to both parties were given in Ex.A4 and the acknowledgments of both the parties are Ex.A5 and A6. No reply was received by the complainant from the opposite parties.

           5.  As per the documents submitted by the Complainant, it is noticed that   the complainant purchased Electric scooter for which the receipt is produced and when it stopped working due to the fault of the Battery within the warranty period itself, the approach by the complainant to the opposite parties failed for free service and the complainant was asked to pay Rs.9,000/-. The demand of Rs.9,000/- is also reflected in the notice  given by the complainant and there was no reply by the opposite parties even after the receipts of the notice. During the warranty period, demand of Rs.9,000/- was made by the opposite parties  proves the unfair trade practice   and also deficiency in service adopted by the opposite parties and opposite parties have not appeared before the forum to disprove the case of the complainant even after the receipt of the notices. Therefore, we are the considered view that the opposite parties are liable to pay for compensation and also to replace the Battery of the vehicle as prayed by the complainant.

08. POINT NO:2

          As discussed earlier, the complainant is entitled for the replacement of the  Battery of the  vehicle  of the complainant (viz Black colour Romai Electric Scooter) free of cost, and also he would have undergone mental agony and strain due to the Scooter lying idle therefore it is fit to order Rs.25,000/- as compensation.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties jointly or severally are ordered to pay a sum of Rs. Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) towards  compensation for causing hardship  and mental agony and also to replace the Battery of the  vehicle  of the complainant (viz Black colour Romai Electric Scooter) at free of cost within a period of 6 weeks.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 13^th  day of November 2018.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 Dated 28.07.2016                  Original Receipts for payment made by the

                                                    Complainant for Vehicle

 

Ex.A2 dated NIL                     E-Scooter vehicle owner Identification/warranty

 

Ex.A3 dated 22.07.2017                   complainant to the opposite parties

 

Ex.A4 dated NIL                     Copy of the Lawyer’s notice

 

Ex.A5 dated 28.07.2017                   Complainant’s counsel to opposite parties

                                                     Acknowledgement cards (3 Nos.)

 

Ex.A6 dated NIL                     Owner’s Manual Book (Romai Electric vehicles

                                                     Pvt. Ltd.,)

 

 

 

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT