Haryana

Kurukshetra

256/2018

Rambhaj Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.R.motor - Opp.Party(s)

Anshik Gupta

04 Jun 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint no. 256 of 2018.

Date of instt. 29.11.2018. 

                                                                      Date of Decision: 04.06.2019.

 

Rambhaj Gupta son of late Sumiterpal, r/o 532/16 JP Colony, Pehowa, District Kurukshetra. 

                                                                ……….Complainant.      

                        Versus

 

1. P.R. Motors, 18 Raj Nagar, Saha Road, Ambala Cantt.

 

2. Okinawa scooters, Unit no.119, First Floor JMD Megapolis, Sector 48, Sohna Road, Gurgaon.

 

3. Patwa Electric Motors, Patwa Farm, Kurukshetra Road, Pehowa.

 

..………Opposite parties.

 

       Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.            

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                Ms. Neelam, Member. 

                Sh. Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member                                          

Present:     Ms. Anshika Gupta, Advocate for complainant.               

 Sh. Kuldeep Kirmach, Advocate for opposite parties.

 

           

ORDER

                                                                         

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Smt. Rambhaj Gupta against P.R. Motors and others, the opposite parties.

2.             It is stated in the complaint that complainant purchased an Okinawa scooter on 4.7.2018 from op no.1 for an amount of Rs.46,000/- and got it registered vide registration No. RH 41 JO 332. That at the time of purchase of vehicle, op no.1 claimed that vehicle would give mileage of atleast 50 Kms per charge but from the very first day it gave mileage of 30 Kms per charge only. The complainant complained for the same to op no.1 telephonically but op no.1 again gave assurance that claimed mileage will come after first service of the vehicle. It is further averred that on the said assurance, the complainant went for first service on 23.7.2018 but thereafter mileage of the scooter fell down initially to 22 kms per charge and then to 10-12 kms per charge within two months of its use only. That complainant again and again complained about the mileage to op no.1 but no heed was given to the requests of complainant. It is further averred that due to some manufacturing defects in the vehicle, the battery of the vehicle got collapsed. The complainant in order to repair it sent the vehicle to op no.3 on 3.10.2018 but no process has been initiated till now. It is further averred that complainant has telephonically as well as through email requested to the op no.1 so many times to repair the vehicle or to refund the money as soon as possible but the ops are adamant. The complainant also got served legal notice upon the ops no.1 and 2 on 22.10.2018 but to no effect. There is deficiency in service on the parts of ops due to which complainant is facing mental harassment. Hence, this complaint.

3.             On notice, opposite parties appeared and sought adjournments for filing written statement but neither filed any written statement nor paid the costs despite various opportunities including last opportunities and as such the defence of ops was struck off.

4.             Learned counsel for complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4.

5.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.          

6.             The complainant in order to prove his case has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A in which he has reiterated all the averments of his complaint. The complainant has also placed on file copy of legal notice Ex.C1. The opposite parties have failed to file any written version on their behalf despite appearance and seeking various adjournments for filing the same. As such the pleadings of the complainant as well as evidence led by complainant goes as unchallenged and unrebutted against the ops. So, it is proved on record that ops have supplied a defective scooter to the complainant and the complainant has suffered loss of money as he has also spent amount on registration of the vehicle besides spending amount on purchase of the vehicle and as such he has suffered harassment at the hands of ops. The ops have caused deficiency in service towards the complainant.

7.             In view of the above, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.46,000/- i.e. price of vehicle to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant will be entitled to interest @7% per annum from the date of order till actual realization. We further direct the ops to further pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as compensation for harassment including litigation expenses to the complainant. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

 

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.: 4.6.2019 

                                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Neelam)           (Sunil Mohan Trikha)        

                Member                     Member