D.O.F:11/12/2020

        D.O.O:28/04/2022

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

 KASARAGOD

CC.No.174/2020                                                                                                                                                

Dated this, the 28^th day of April 2022

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                        : PRESIDENT

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M: MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                            : MEMBER

T.V Jayan

“Thanal”,Moodankoodal

P.O Bengalam - 671314                                                                 : Complainant

Nileshwaram, Kasaragod

                                                       And

1. Victory Electric Vehicles International Ltd

172/12 VPO – Rohad, Industrial Area, Bahadurgarh

City District Jhajjar Landmark City,

Park Metro Station, Bahadurgarh

Hariyana – 124501                                                                          : Opposite Parties

2. C.K.P Trade Links

State Dealers in Victory E- Rikshaw & Scooty,

Markaz Building, Kanichira,Thaikadapuram Road

Nileshwar.

ORDER

SMT.BEENA.K.G: MEMBER

     The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.  The Opposite Party No:1 is the manufactures of Electric scooter and Opposite Party No:2 is the dealer of the electric vehicle.

     The complainant is alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the  part of Opposite Party as the  veero electric scooter purchased from Opposite Party No:2 became defective within 1 year of purchase.  The complainant purchased an electric scooter from Opposite Party No:2 on 17/05/2019 for Rs. 65000/-.  At the time of delivery Opposite Party promised 3 years warranty for battery of the scooter and lifelong free service. On 17-10-2020 the scooter stopped during travel and was entrusted to Opposite Party for repair. But so far the vehicle is not returned after curing defects. The deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party caused severe mental pain and loss to the complainant. Hence the complaint is seeking a compensation of Rs 50,000/- from Opposite Party.

     Notice of Opposite Party returned stating that addressee not known,

   The Complainant furnished fresh address of Opposite Party. Notice issued to opposite Party but returned. After waiting for reasonable time taken as deemed service. Notice of Opposite Party No: 2 served. Name of Opposite Party No: 1 and 2 called absent, set exparte.

       The Complainant filed proof affidavit. Ext A1 marked. Ext A1 is the booking form of electric scooter veero for Rs 65000/-.

The issues raised for consideration are:-

1.  Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party?
2. Whether complainant entitled for relief?
3. If so what is the relief?

The complainant purchased an electric scooty from Opposite Party for Rs 65000/- on 17/5/2019.  The battery of the vehicle had 3 years warranty and Opposite Party promised lifelong free service to the scooter. The vehicle became defective on 17-10-2020, while on travel and entrusted to Opposite Party for repair. The aforesaid vehicle was not repaired and returned to the complainant so far.

      We carefully gone through the affidavit and documents. The complainant  had given the scooter for repair on 17-10-2020 after completion of one year of purchase.   The failure to repair and return the vehicle by curing defects shows gross deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party.  After completion of one year Opposite Party failed to repair and deliver it.  In the absence of rebuttal evidence there is inordinate delay occurred in repairing the vehicle.   Certainly there is gross deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party.

      The complainant had spent Rs 65000/- for the scooter as it is highly essential for his day to day journeys but due to the lethargic and irresponsible attitude of Opposite Party, complainant undergone huge loss and mental strain. The Complaint loss and mental agony has to be compensated.   Considering the circumstances of this case, and in the absence of rebuttal evidence we are of the view that of Rs. 50,000/- is a reasonable compensation  this case.

     Therefore complaint is allowed directing Opposite Party No: 1 and 2 to give compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) along with Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as cost to the complainant.

     The time for compliance is thirty days from the receipt of the copy of the judgement.

      Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                                      Sd/-

MEMBER                                          MEMBER                                          PRESIDENT

Exhibit

A1- Booking/Receipt Form

     Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                          MEMBER                                          PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

Ps/                                                                              Assistant Registrar