IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Wednesday the 30th day of March, 2011
Filed on 22.09.10
Present
- Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
- Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
- Smt. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.224/10
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri.G.Remanan, 1. The Managing Director,
Arayakadavu Nikarthil, R.M.P. Infotech Pvt.Ltd, F1-1st Floor,
Thirumalabhagom.P.O., Appollo Dubai Plaza 100, Mahalingapuram,
Thuravoor-688 540, Main Road, Chennai – 600 034.
Cherthala Thaluk,
Alappuzha. Kerala, 2. The Managing Director
Pin 688 540 M/s.Rashee Motors, VRLA Manufacturing
(By Adv.E.D.Zacharias) Company, Khasra No.573/409,
Dharampur Sai Road, Baddi, Tebsur,
Nalagarh Dist. Solan, Pin 600 053
3. The Manager, Prime Exim Floor No.102,
Karuveli Road, Mamangalam,
Palarivattom, Edappally,
Kochi – 682 025.
4. R.Ratheesh, S/o Raveendran,
Ulakamthara, Thirumalabhagam.P.O.,
Thuravoor, Cherthala.
(By Adv.P.A.Sivarajan)
O R D E R
SRI.K.ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER)
Sri.Ramanan, senior citizen has filed this complaint before the Forum on 22.09.2010 alleging deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties. The brief facts of the allegation are as follows:- As per the assurance given by the representative of the first opposite party, he had purchased a Rahee Electronic Scooter (E-bike) for a price of Rs.26000/- (Rupees twenty six only) from the 3rd opposite party at Edappally, Cochin. 4th opposite party was the representative. First opposite party is marketed by the said vehicle and it is manufactured by the second opposite party. The opposite parties assured and offered that the said E-bike is a good performing scooter manufactured under advanced and sophisticated technology and used super quality spare parts. The opposite parties have placed business in all over Kerala and India. At the time of purchase, the opposite parties had convinced him that he is eligible for a warranty of one year together with the free services and maintenance and that the said vehicle will have a milage of 40 km at a stretch after fully charging the batteries for six months and cost will be Rs.5/- per day. They offered four free services at Ernakulam. He could not ride the bike for a distances of 40 km at a stretch and with charged battery for 6 hours, he was able to ride only 2.5 km. The vehicle witnessed a chain of break downs. The opposite parties have never attended break downs. He had taken the vehicle in another carriage to Ernakulam twice, which costs Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand only). Due to the non-performance of the vehicle, he could not use the vehicle effectively. He has not obtained any positive steps from the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint seeking relief.
1. Notices were issued to the opposite parties. First opposite party entered appearance and prays for version. But later they are absent. Considering their absence, they were set exparte. Opposite parties 2 to 4 are not entered appearance before this Forum. They were declared as exparte, and preceded the matter.
2. Considering the allegation of the complainant the Forum has raised the following issues for consideration.
a) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite parties?
b) Whether the complainant is entitled to get back the price of the vehicle?
c) Relief?
Issues 1 to 3
3. Complainant has filed proof affidavit in support of his case and produced one document in evidence – Ext. A1 marked. It is the voucher given to the complainant by the first opposite party. It shows the purchase of the said Rahee E-bike, Bike model, vehicle identification No., Dealers Name and its serial No. It shows the qualities of the said bike.
4. We have examined the facts in detail and perused the records produced by the complainant. It is alleged that the complainant had purchased the sid Bike for a sum of Rs.26000/- (Rupees twenty six thousand only), from the 3rd opposite party, as per the assurance given by the 4th opposite party. The representative of the 3rd opposite party furnished the details regarding the performance of the said Bike and its service condition to the complainant. But contrary to the assurance of the opposite parties, within a short period, the said Bike has a chain of break down and the complainant had not able to ride the Bike for a distance of 40 km on a stretch as agreed by the 3rd opposite party and that with the charged batteries for 6 hours, he was able to ride only 2.5 km. It is further stated that there is shortage of milage and have non performance of the vehicle. When contacted the opposite parties by the complainant, the opposite parties have not turned up to rectify the defects in service, replacement of the vehicle or request of the refund amount of the vehicle. At the time of purchase of the vehicle the opposite parties have assured that they will attend the services and refund if in case any defects and assured him that the said vehicle have one year warranty. But the opposite parties have taken a negligent view in respect of the defects of the vehicle purchased by the complainant. The whole affairs of the matter shows the unfair trade practice of the opposite parties and their irresponsible attitude against this issue. For this the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable. In this respect it is to be further noticed that the opposite parties have not turned up to attend this Forum properly to explain the details of this disputes involved in this case. This shows their irresponsible attitude towards this case. The entire affairs of this case, shows that there is unfair trade practice latches, deficiency in service and negligence on the side of the opposite parties by way of evading from the assurance given by them to the complainant regarding the overall performance of the bike and its service conditions and refusal to pay back the price of the vehicle since the vehicle has manufacturing defects. In this respect we are of the view that the allegations raised by the complainant against the opposite parties are to be treated as genuine and that the complainant is fully entitled to get back the price of the said bike together with the compensation and costs. All the issues are found in favour of the complainant. So, the complaint is allowed.
In the result, we hereby direct the 3rd and 4th opposite parties to return the price of the said Rahee E-bike ie., Rs.26000/- (Rupees twenty six thousand only) to the complainant, after take back the said defective bike from the complainant and pay a sum of Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant for his mental agony, pain, sufferings, harassment, loss and inconvenience, due to the misrepresentation of facts, illegal assurance regarding the performance of the bike, unfair trade practice, cheating, by way of grossest deficiency in service and negligence on the side of the opposite parties and further pay a sum of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant as costs of this proceedings. We further direct the opposite parties 3rd and 4th to comply the order within 20 days from the date of this order.
Complainant allowed.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of March, 2011.
Sd/-Sri.K. Anirudhan
Sd/-Sri. Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext. A1 - The Voucher and the certificate given to the complainant by the 1st opposite party
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- k.x/-
Compared by:-
