Delhi

West Delhi

CC/17/320

MADAL LAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

YC ELECTRIC - Opp.Party(s)

15 Jan 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

CASE NO.  320/2017

SH. MADAN LAL

R/O N-17A/461, T-HUTS,

PATHARWALA BAGH, J.J. COLONY,

WAZIRPUR, DELHI-110052.                                            …..Complainant

V E R S U S

 

YC ELECTRIC VEHICLES (YATRI E-RICKSHAW).

OFFICE ADD- PLOT NO. 8, MEERA ENCLAVE,

CHOUKHANDI, KHYALA, NEW DELHI-110018.

 

FACTORY ADD- PLOT NO. 1, GALI NO. 11,

KHASRA NO. 87/4,5,6,7 INDUSTRIAL AREA,

UNDYOG NAGAR, MUNDKA, NEW DELHI-110041.…..Opposite Party-1

 

 

O  R  D  E  R

 

 

PUNEET LAMBA, MEMBER

The complainant, Sh. Madan Lal has filed the present complaint against OP under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Briefly the facts as stated by the complainant are that he purchased one E-Rickshaw for a sum of Rs. 1,07,892/- on 27.06.2016 from OP. After sometime there was problem in battery of E-Rickshaw and he approached OP and who replaced the battery with charging Rs. 3150/- with warranty. Again, the battery developed fault and complainant approached OP but the same was not replaced by the OP. Hence, the present complaint for direction to the OP to provide new batteries with warranty and compensation for mental and physical harassment and litigation expenses. 

          After notice, OP filed reply to the complaint taking preliminary objections that the complaint is false and there is no cause of action against OP and the complainant has suppressed the material facts. The complainant has not made Guru Ji E-Rickshaw and JPM Group as necessary parties. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant purchased E-Rickshaw. It is averred that there is no defect in the batteries and the complaint is false, fabricated and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

          When the parties asked to file evidence, complainant filed affidavit of evidence reiterating the facts of the complaint on oath and on the other hand Mr. Kapil Katyal, Partner of YC Electric Vehicles filed affidavit of evidence reiterating the contents of the reply on oath.

          We have heard complainant in person and have gone through the material on record carefully and thoroughly.

          The controversy involved in the present case is as to whether the complainant is entitled for the relief he claimed or not. From the perusal of the record, it reveals that the complainant purchased one E-Rickshaw vide Invoice dated 27.06.2016 from OP. However, the batteries in dispute were not replaced by OP and there is any iota of evidence to support the same. Moreover, the batteries were replaced with payments of Rs. 3150/- with warranty by someone else which is not made party here.

Keeping in view above discussions and observations, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the present case. Resultantly, the present complaint dismissed.

          File be consigned to Record Room.

          Copy of this order be given as per rules.

          Pronounced on _______15TH_____ January, 2020.

 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                    (S.S. SIDHU)                              (K.S. MOHI)

    MEMBER                             MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT