BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSALFORUM, FATEHABAD.
Complaint no. 134/2019.
Date of Instt. 08.04.2019.
Date of Decision: 13.12.2019
Ajab Singh S/o Balbir Singh aged-30 yrs. R/o Village Bhattu Kalan, Tehsil & District Fathebad.
..Complainant.
Versus
- Okinawa Scooters, Okinawa Autotech Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. E-28, RIICO Industrial Area, Khushkhera, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar-301707(Rajasthan) through Sales Manager/Managing Director.
- Shri Balaji Motors, Authorized Dealer (Sale Service Spares Okinawa Autotech. Pvt. Ltd) G.T. Sirsa Road, Near Setia Palace, Fatehabad-125050(Haryana) through its Proprietor.
- Parkash Enterprises, Authorized Dealer (Sale Service Spares Okinawa Autotech. Pvt. Ltd.) Opp. Setia Marriage Palace, Sirsa Road, Fatehabad through its proprietor.
..Respondents/OPs.
Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Before: Sh.Raghbir Singh, President.
Sh. Jasvinder Singh, Member.
Argued by: Sh. Sher Singh, Advocate for complainant.
Ops already exparte.
ORDER
The present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant against the OPs with the averments that Op No. 1 is a manufacturer of Okinava Scooters and OP No. 2 and 3 are the dealers of OP No. 1. It is further submitted that vide bill no. 147 dated 31.12.2017, the complainant purchased an electric Scooter (Ridge) 30 Frame No. M5WBBEBAMH-1102756, Motor No. BBE102940, Color Glossy/White, Battery No. MN2H-AH-120211-EW, Battery No. MN2H-AH-120540-EW, Battery No. MN2H-AH-120212-EW, Battery No. MN2H-AH-120537-EW, Battery No. MN2H-AH-120539-EW from OP no. 2. The complainant made a payment of Rs.37,857/- to OP No. 2 for purchasing the above said scooter and a bill regarding the same was also issued to the complainant. Now the OP No. 1 has given the dealership of the Okinava Scooters to OP no. 3. Therefore, the complainant is consumer of the Ops.
2. It is further submitted that at the time of purchase of the above said scooter, it was assured by OP No. 2 that the electric scooter in question is of very good quality and the batteries of the same are also of very good quality and a warranty and guarantee for one year the batteries was also given to the complainant. It was also assured that in case any defect will crept in the batteries in that eventuality the same will be replaced and in case any fault will crept in the scooter in one year then that will also be rectified without charging any amount from the complainant.
3. It is further submitted that after a period of 6-7 months from the date of purchase of the scooter in question the batteries of the same stopped charging and alsostopped working. Regarding the same, the complainant contacted OP No. 2 and it was assured by OP No. 2 that the batteries will be replaced and the documents of warranty and guarantee were taken back by OP No. 2 from the complainant. However, despite many visits made by the complainant the batteries were not replaced by OP No. 2 and it was told that the function of OP No. 2 is just to sell the scooters and not to replace the same and refused to receive the defected batteries. When the complainant requested to OP No. 2 to handover the documents and warranty and guarantee then it was told by OP No. 2 that the same have already been sent to OP No. 1 and when the same will be received back the OP No. 2 will handover to the complainant. It is further submitted that in between the dealership of the Scooter in question was given to OP No. 3 in place of OP No. 2 by OP No. 1. Therefore, the complainant contacted OP No. 3 for replacement of the batteries but OP No. 3 replied that since the vehicle in question was not sold by him as such he is not liable for replacement of the batteries and OP No. 3 flatly refused to replace the batteries. Thereafter, the complainant tried to contact OP No. 2 telephonically but he refused to receive the telephone.
4. It is further submitted that the complainant is engaged in the work of selling bags and on account of the fact that the scooter is not working he is suffering a loss of Rs.20,000/- per month. It is further submitted that the above said act on the part of the Ops amount to deficiency in rendering service to him and as such he is also entitled for compensation. The complainant has further prayed that the Ops may be directed for replacement of the batteries of the scooter in question or refund an amount of Rs.37,857/- as original cost of the vehicle in question. The complainant has also further prayed that the Ops may be directed for making a payment of Rs.1,00,000/- to him as compensation. Hence, the present complaint.
5. Despite proper service, the Ops did not appear before this Forum and as such, OP No. 1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.05.2019 and the OP No. 3 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 14.06.2019 and OP No. 2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 10.09.2019.
6. We have duly heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the complainant and have also perused the documents placed on record. It is the case of the complainant that the OP No. 1 is manufacturer of Okinava Scooters and OP No. 2 & OP No. 3 are the dealers of the OP No. 1. It is the further the case of the complainant that on 13.12.2017 Okinava Electric Scooter was purchased by him vide bill number 147 from OP No. 2 for an amount of Rs.37,857/-. It is further the case of the complainant that at the time of purchase of above said scooter, it was assured by the OP No. 2 that the batteries of the electric scooter are of very good quality and warranty and guarantee of one year of the batteries was also given to the complainant by OP No. 2 and it was further assured that in case any fault will crept in the batteries in that eventuality the same would be replaced by the Ops. It is further the case of the complainant that within a period of 6-7 months, the batteries in question stopped charging and also stopped working. Since the fault crept in the batteries within the warranty period as such the complainant approached OP No. 2 & OP No. 3 for replacement of the same. However neither OP No. 2 nor OP No. 3 replaced the batteries in question and moreover OP No. 2 refused to return the warranty card to him which was already obtained by him. It is further the case of the complainant that the Ops have violated the terms and the conditions of the warranty and the same amounts to deficiency on their part in rendering service to him.
7. In support of his case, the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit as Ex. CW-1/A wherein the averments made in the complaint have been affirmed. The complainant has also placed on record invoice dated 31.12.2017 Ex. C-1 and a perusal of the same reveals that the scooter in question was purchased by him from OP No. 2 by making a payment of Rs.34,900/- on 31.12.2017. From perusal of the Ex. C-1 further, it is further revealed that the batteries in question were also purchased alongwith the scooter in question. The complainant has also placed on record a document dated 02.01.2018 Ex. C-2 and perusal of the same reveals that the OP No. 2 is authorized dealer of the OP No. 1. The complainant has also placed on record a document Ex. C-3 and a perusal of the same reveals that OP No. 1 is manufacturer of the scooter in question.
8. The Ops neither appeared before this Forum nor submitted any reply and as such the averments made by the complainant have gone unrebutted.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant has been able to prove deficiency on the part of the OP no. 1 being manufacturer of the scooter in question in rendering service to him. The complaint is accordingly allowed against OP no. 1 and he is directed for replacement of the batteries in question without charging any cost from the complainant. No deficiency against OP no. 2 and 3 is proved. The present order be complied within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of this order be furnished to both the parties free of cost as provided in the rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum:
Dt.13.12.2019
(Jasvinder Singh) (Raghbir Singh)
Member DCDRF, Fatehabad.
President
