BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 337 of 2022.
Date of Institution : 11.05.2022.
Date of Decision : 05.08.2024.
Lakhwinder Singh son of Sh. Pyara Singh, caste Jat Sikh, resident of Prem Nagar, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa. (Mobile No. 97295-90716).
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Proprietor H.R. Groups (Dealer of Sundak E- Vehicle Mass) near J.G. College, near Kissan Chowk and Ajay Vihar, Sector-20, HUDA, Sirsa. M. No. 94677-09644 and M. No. 81999-96899.
2. Sundak E- Vehicle (Sundak Electric Eco-tech Mass through M.D. of E-vehicle Sundak, Plot No.103, Ecotech-6, Kasna Pari Chowk, Greater Noida- U.P. (M. No. 90159-81781 and 99536-65216).
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………………….MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. J.N. Monga, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Mukesh Arya, Advocate for opposite party no.1.
Opposite party no.2 already exparte.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to OPs).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that on 08.10.2021 complainant had purchased one E-vehicle scooty 9Sundak E-Vehicle Mass) from op no.1 for a sum of Rs.67,000/- vide bill No. HR-5234/21/22 dated 08.10.2021. That just after three months of purchase of said scooty, same became defective and its battery used to become low and its handle started hanging. The complainant approached to the ops in this regard and op no.1 kept the scooty with it for some days and thereafter handed over the same to the complainant by saying that now scooty is alright. It is further averred that thereafter also the scooty used to become defective and its battery was not charging and used to become down in early time and its handle became loose and op no.1 again kept the scooty for 15 days and after repair handed over the same to him but the scooty is still having same defects. That its handle is defective and it used to stop after heating and its battery is not charging properly and is stopped in some distance and now the scooty is completely stopped and its battery is dead and same is lying at his house and in this way the ops have sold a defective and old scooty to the complainant. It is further averred that complainant also got served a legal notice dated 19.08.2022 upon the op no.1 but despite that they have not redressed the grievances of complainant despite several telephonic call also and complainant has been harassed by visiting the office of op no.1 time and again. That complainant purchased the scooty for his child who has to go to his school but the purpose of purchasing the scooty has not been completed and he is going and coming on rickshaw due to which complainant is suffering financial loss and the ops have not provided proper after sale services to the complainant and are deficient in service. Hence, this complaint seeking direction to the ops to either replace the scooty with new one or to make refund of the price of the scooty i.e. Rs.67,000/- alongwith interest and also to pay compensation for harassment.
3. On notice, op no.1 appeared and filed written version submitting therein that complaint has been filed only to harass the op no.1. The scooty is not having any type of defect but despite that op no.1 changed its handle and battery on the asking of complainant and also resolved minor complaints without any charges but complainant is not at all satisfied. That at the time of sale of said scooty, complainant was told that he will be provided guarantee of battery but despite that on the complaint of complainant, the service of the scooty was done time and again without any charges and its battery was also replaced despite the fact that same was alright and besides that its other parts were also changed for which the op no.1 was not having any liability. The complainant has filed the present false complaint only to grab money and to return the scooty. It is further submitted that now as scooty is not being liked by complainant, he is making false excuses to return the scooty. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.
4. Op no.2 did not appear despite notice and as such op no.2 was proceeded against exparte.
5. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and copies of documents i.e. invoice Ex.C2, legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipt Ex.C4 and delivery report Ex.C5.
6. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Rajnish as Ex.R1.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the appearing parties and have gone through the case file.
8. From the invoice dated 08.10.2021 Ex.C2, it is evident that on 8.10.2021 the complainant purchased the Scooty in question from op no.1 for a sum of Rs.67,000/-. The complainant has alleged that scooty developed defects just after three months of its purchase and alleges that same turns off after heating, its battery is not charging and there is also defect in its handle and the said defects could not be removed by op no.1 after some repairs. On the other hand, op no.1 asserted that scooty is not having any type of defect but despite that op no.1 changed its handle and battery on the asking of complainant and also resolved minor complaints without any charges but complainant is not at all satisfied. Op no.1 has further asserted that at the time of sale of said scooty, complainant was told that he will be provided guarantee of battery but despite that on the complaint of complainant, the service of the scooty was done time and again without any charges and its battery was also replaced despite the fact that same was alright and besides that its other parts were also changed for which the op no.1 was not having any liability and that complainant has filed the present false complaint only to grab money and to return the scooty and now as scooty is not being liked by complainant, he is making false excuses to return the scooty. Except bald statements of complainant as well as op no.1 by way of affidavits, there is nothing on file to prove the fact that whether scooty is having above said defects as alleged by complainant or not or that whether op no.1 has changed the battery and its handle or not because neither complainant has produced any mechanical report to prove the fact that scooty is having above said defects nor op no.1 has produced any document regarding replacement of battery and its handle although op no.1 has asserted that battery of scooty was already changed by him. So, we are of the considered opinion that end of justice, would be met if the op no.1 is directed to make the scooty defect free even by replacement of battery and handle without charging anything from complainant.
9. In view of our above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the opposite party no.1 to repair the scooty in question and to make it defect free even by replacing its battery and handle or any other defective parts without any costs within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complainant is directed to take the scooty to op no.1 and to hand over the same after proper receipt well within time. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of present case, both the complainant and op no.1 are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced. Member Member President
Dt. 05.08.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
