BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 16^thDAY OF OCTOBER 2024

ORDER

SMT. K. ANITA SHIVKUMAR, MEMBER

Complainant filed the complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking direction to OP to compensate the mental agony caused by OP due to its negligence in act and unfair trade practice indulged by the OP, to pay compensation of Rs.1000/- per day for the daily commute from March2^nd 2024 to till delivery of his vehicle, request Honorable Commission to pass such an order for battery replacement and service at free cost, to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- plus daily commitenceof Rs.1000/- per day from 2^nd march 2024 to till delivery of the vehicle and such other reliefs as prayed in the prayer.

2. Brief facts of the case as below:-

Complainant stated that his vehicle was stopped in middle of the road for the reason of overheating of motor. Vehicle was not moving, automatically reduced its performance changing to echo mode, the backside support tail shaking, reduced mileage, vibration noise necessary for fork arm upgrade due to the above mentioned problems complainant need to stop the vehicle often to reduce its temperature and move again. To rectify the problems left his vehicle with authorized service station of OLA i.e, OLA Experience Centre at Sunkadakatte on 2/3/2024.But after few days when the OP has assured to deliver after rectification of a vehicle. Complainant called OP but OP did not deliver the vehicle. The vehicle got problem like a vehicle pillion rider backside support tail shaking issue and not getting expected mileage as promised by OP Company, vibration and noise while driving the vehicle fork arm upgrade, overheating. One Mr.Harish, Area Service Manager informed complaint that due to the unavailability of parts he requested some more time and promised that he deliver the vehicle by 7^thMarch 2024. Accordingly complainant visited OP on 7/3/2024 to take delivery of his vehicle. The technician room was closed and on the door of an office mentioned that 3 days service closed but technician was available and he was busy with some call. After some times he met technician to get information about the vehicle but technician was unaware of the vehicle conditions and one area service manager was only on leave on that day. Then complainant called Harish, Area service Manager and got to know that vehicle is missing from the show room and even OP unaware about the location of a vehicle he told that the vehicle has been stolen and trying to locate the vehicle. Sine vehicle got GPS facility, every track of vehicle was observed by complainant. He requested for the time to trace it out. Then complainant observed that even inside or the outside of the OLA Experience Centre located in Sunkadakatte,has not installed any CCTV inside and outside the premises, though it is located on the main road. He also alleged that more than 20 vehicles parked outside the gate of the OP on the road without even installation of the CCTV which is very difficult to trace it out. Complainant called Regional service head Mr. Sudhindra, informed missing of a vehicle. Even they requested for 1 hour time to trace it out. Even after an hour, complainant did not receive any reply from the Regional service head. Complainant try to contact him over phone but he did not receive the call, even their employees try to call him not given any response to the same. One Mr.Praveen from OLA sales team sent an Email to Sudheendramarking all other Regional heads and officials of OLA team of on 7/3/2024 at 06:35 pm regarding the issue. After receipt of the Email area service Manager Harish stated that the vehicle is located in Yelahanka and checking Camerasaround and investigating who has taken the vehicles fromOLA Service Experience Centre after multiple calls, Area service manager and regional head Vijay and service head Sudheendra brought his vehicle in Porterrented truck on 7/3/2024 at 09.00 pm.The vehicle was full with the damages like back light of the vehicle was broken,few damages on the scratches on the  vehicle body panel which are apparent on the face complainant stated that internal condition is not aware at the time of observing the vehicle back. When complainant check the OLA electric mobile app tracking of vehicle on 7/3/2024 at 4:51 pm was showing the vehicle was in Yeshwantpur location. Complainant produced several tracking report in his complainant with time and date of the vehicle is where it has taken and how many kilometers it ran from march 2^nd to March 7^th. Hence, the complainant alleged is the vehicle was supposed to handover after rectification of the problems arisedin the vehicle from Sunkadakatte OLA Experience center, between these days vehicle was stolen and roamed around the city. Complainant further alleged that according to the tracking report vehicle was taken in many location and might have used for any illegal activities without the consent of the complainant and OP company, the vehicle was stolen fromOLA Experience Center Sunkadakattefor their negligence vehicle was damaged badly and it is unfair trade practice of OP along with the deficiency of service caused mental agony hardship inconvenience to the complainant and in future any legal consequences comes with regard to the vehicle in stolen period complainant stated that the responsibility and liability on OPs for such activities. Complainant sent several Emails and also OP inturnresponded to the complainant through Email, but not find any resolution for their grievance raised to complainant.Therefore, complainant approached this commission for the relief sought supra.

3. Notice sent to OP 1 and 2 through RPAD. Despite the service and sufficient OP 1 and 2 remained absent on the date of appearance. Hence OPs 1 and 2 are placed ex-parte.

4. Complainant filed affidavit evidence along with certificate under section 63 of BharatiyaSakshaAdiniyama, 2023 and also filed 10 documents. In support to the affidavit evidence of the complainant. Complainant has also produced audio recorded pen drive and its transcript. The documents produced by complainant are marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P30. Complainant further submitted written arguments and also oral arguments to defend his case, heard complainants arguments and perused the materials on record.

5. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency of service on the part of OP’s?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

 6. Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

                        Point No.1:- Affirmative.

                        Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

                        Point No.3:- As per the final order.

REASONS

7. Point No.1 and 2: These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

8. On perusal of the complaint and the documents, complainant has purchased OLA electric SI Pro vehicle bearing No.KA02 KN1257 in the year 2022, believing seamless and eco-friendly committing experience but within short time complainant experienced unexpected issues in the vehicle and got repaired in OLA experience center in Sunkadakatte on 2^nd March 2024. Due to various technical and mechanical issues he left his vehicle at sunkadakatte service center. With utter shop the complainant got information about the vehicle was stolen from the showroom. Complainant was supposed to collect the vehicle on 07/03/2024 but he received the message about the theft of the vehicle when the vehicle was in the custody of OP. With a lack of security measures such as CCTV surveillance OP has to protect the vehicles of its consumers till its possession. We observed here without the installation of the CCTV vehicles of the consumers used to park inside and outside the premises of the OP, is seems to be unsafe and clear cut negligence on the part of OP. after the theft of the vehicle complainant often called to the head of the OP company and sent several E mails with regard to the vehicle OP has not taken serious and traced stolen vehicle. Complainant registered police complaint before Kamakshipalya Police station on 16/3/024 stating that the vehicle was missing from the service Centre and sought investigation during the period whether it was involved in any illegal activities. The complainant only concern is in case the vehicle was used for any illegal, misappropriation and misused when it was stolen its utter negligence on the part of the OP. NO. 1 without the due diligence about the vehicle in possession OP.NO.1 caused deficiency of service. After the regular follow-ups OP traced out finally at Yelahanka and brought the vehicle with the help of the porter truck since the vehicle was severely damaged. The complainant has handover vehicle for rectification of the technical problems, but due to the negligence and carelessness OP.NO. 1, has not rectified the vehicle more than that OP has caused mental agony, hardship inconvenience to the complainant by the theft of the vehicle. More so complainant received the vehicle not with the rectification of the technical issues, OP caused severe damages to vehicle and return to the complainant. Due to non-availability of the vehicle for the 5-6 days complainant has to pay the monetary burden for committing from his work placeto home, is claimed by complainant.

9. In pursuant to the complaint raised before OP, complainant not received any resolutions for his grievance. OPCompany and their executive’s heads are so negligent without taking proper care about the consumer’s vehicle and also not serious to raise the complaint about stolen vehicle till his follow-ups, shows their intention and their negligence. OP as a vendor sold the vehicle and should take care of the consumers to keep them happy,comfortable with the vehicle and service provider. Here in our considered view, OP has caused total deficiency in service by keeping the vehicle without providing any security measures. In present scenario, Electrical vehicles having facility of tracking and each and every movements of vehicle from their mobile app. As per the tracking record complainant has tracked with the vehicle was roaming in different areas of the Bangalore but OP neglected to search the vehicle which was in their possession.

10. Though the OP has agreed to handover the rectified vehicle on 07/03/2024, but the OP fail to hand over the same due to its negligence. Complainant claimed Rs.1000/- per day for daily commutence expenses from 02/03/2024 till the delivery of the vehicle. He also claimed for Rs.5,00,000/- towards mental agony sufferings and hardship caused by OPs deficiency of service, seems to be exorbitant. Therefore complainant is entitled to get Rs.30,000/- towards compensation, Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance charges borne by him.

11. Complainant has given his vehicle for the rectification of certain problems in the vehicle, OP1damaged the vehicle for its negligence. Complainant claimed the battery of the vehicle and the body panel should be replaced with free of cost. OPs are liable to rectify the earlier problems in the vehicle and also the later damages caused within 30 days from the date of order. Without consent of complainant and OPs the vehicle roamed throughout Bangalore as per the Bangalore tracking report submitted by the complainant. Hence,in our considered view OP is liable to replace the battery for over usage by the 3^rd person due to the negligence of OP No.1. In the above reasons the answer point No.1 and 2 with affirmative and partly affirmative respectively.

12. Point No.3:- In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

1. Complainant filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, is allowed in part.
2. OPs 1 and 2 jointly and severally liable to replace battery and rectify the damages in the vehicle for the satisfaction of complainant / free from defects within 30 days from the date of order.
3. OPs shall pay Rs.30,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards expenses for conveyance charges borne by complainant, to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation within 30 days from the date of order failing which OPs shall pay interest on Award amount at the rate of 10% per annum from 02/03/2024 till realization.
4. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 16^THday of OCTOBER 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows: