FINAL ORDER/JUDGMENT           

SHRI SWAPAN KUMAR MAHANTY,   PRESIDENT

            Brief facts of the case are that the complainant purchased a Viertric V4 Model Electric Scooter being E-Scooter V4-Excel Colour- Red, Chassis No. VMPLO2P 2020K0146 on 04.09.2020 against invoice No. VMPL/K54/20-21 at Rs. 45,000/- from OP-1. The subject scooter was delivered on 04.09.2020. Since purchased the complainant realized that the subject scooter is defective though it was delivered as new. The subject scooter is endangering the life of the complainant along with her family members. The scooter is poor quality and despite several request the OP-1 did not replace the subject scooter.  The service centre of OP-1 did not repair the scooter free of cost on the ground the spare parts of the scooter is not available and it should be purchased by the complainant at her own cost. The OPs 2 to 7 are the Directors of OP-1 Viertric Motors Pvt. Ltd. Alleging deficient in service and unfair trade practice the complainant filed the instant consumer case with the following reliefs:-

1. Direct the OPs to refund Rs. 45,000/- along with interest @ 24 %,
2. Direct the OPs to pay Rs  1,00,000/- as compensation
3. Direct the OPs to pay Rs.  25,000/- as litigation cost

Despite publication of notice in the daily newspaper, the OPs did not turn up to contest the case by filing WV within the statutory period as provided under the provision of CP Act. Thus, the case runs ex parte against the OPs.

Complainant Dipa Chakraborty files her evidence by way of affidavit. She also relied the documents annexed with the complaint petition. Complainant also files written argument. We have carefully considered the argument advance by the Ld. Advocate for the complainant and examined the consumer complaint along with its annexure thereto.

Fact remains that the complainant purchased a Viertric V4 Model Electric Scooter being E-Scooter V4-Excel Colour- Red, Chassis No. VMPLO2P 2020K0146 on 04.09.2020 against invoice No. VMPL/K54/20-21 at Rs. 45,000/- and the said scooter was delivered to the complainant on  04.09.2020. The grievance of the complainant is that the OP-1 sold a defective scooter to her in place of a new scooter. She had been to show room of OP-1  for repair of the scooter but the employee of service centre told that the spare parts of the scooter is not available and the complainant should purchase spare parts at her own cost. The OP-1 failed to promise free service and the repairs the subject scooter within the warranty period. Vide letter dated 15.01.2021 the complainant requested the OPs to refund of Rs. 45,000/- being the sale price of the subject scooter to the complainant along with compensation. The said notice was unattended by the OPs. In our opinion, the complainant is a consumer Under section 2 (7) of the CP Act and there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs Under Sections of 2 (11) & 2 (42) of the CP Act, 2019.

Based on the above discussion, the present consumer complaint is partly allowed ex parte against the OPs with following directions.
          The OPs are jointly and severally directed to refund the sale price of Rs.  45,000/- of the subject scooter to the complainant within 90 days from the date of the order. We do not pass any order with regard to compensation and cost of litigation. If the OPs failed to comply with the above directions made above within the period mentioned above, then the complainant is at liberty to get the order implemented due course of law.

Copy of the judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost as per CP Act. Upload the judgment on the website of this Commission for perusal of the parties.