Orissa

Sambalpur

CC/49/2019

Kaushik Koudi - Complainant(s)

Versus

1-Hero Electrical Vechicles Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

27 Feb 2023

ORDER

PRESIDENT DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

                             CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 49/2019

 

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,

Kaushik Koudi,

At-Bhalubahal, PO- Ardabahal, Ps-Mahulpali

Tahl-Kuchinda, Dist-Sambalpur-768222.Odisha,                            ……..Complainant

Versus

1. M/S Hero Electrical Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.

50, Okhla Industrial Estate-3,

New Delhi-110020, India.

2. Sai Enterprises(Hero Electric Vehicle)

At/Po-Kuchinda, PS-Kuchinda,

Dist-Sambalpur-768222, Odisha.                                  …...Opp.Parties

 

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant                   :-         Self
2. For the O.P.No.1                          :-         Sri. R.K.Kar, Advocate &Associates
3. For the O.P. No.2                         :-         None

 

Date of Filing:19.08.2019,Date of Hearing :10.01.2023, Date of Judgement : 27.02.2023

  Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant purchased a NYX model white Scooter for Rs. 38,090/- from O.P. No.2 M/S Sai Enterprises, Kuchinda for his son. At the time of purchase back-light cover was broken and the seller assured to provide the part within short span of time. It was not replaced. The battery of the vehicle after full charge covering 54 Kms instead of 65/75 Kms as per manual. This fact was also complained.

Since 12.08.2018 the turn indication not worked. The O.Ps neither gave free service nor paid service. On 14.11.2018 the front wheel bearing was out of order, the matter complaint before the O.Ps but repair made spending Rs. 300/-.

Since 25.04.2018 the speedo meter was not working but the O.Ps although given assurance to change not complied. On 09.06.2019 the battery cell was swollen and charged down. The O.Ps informed, charged the battery taking Rs. 4000/- from the Complainant. The vehicle run up to 19.06.2019 and thereafter due to non-stability of charge not in running condition, even not going 12 Kms after full charge.

On 25.05.2019 complaint was made to O.P. No.1. The free services three numbers have not been provided. For battery 6 times paid service facility is there but during service facility but during 4^th time battery became non-functional.

Being aggrieved this complaint was filed.

2. The O.P. No.1 in its version submitted that the Complainant purchased the vehicle on 13.05.2018. In the bill the Complainant given signature that the vehicle has been taken in possession in good condition. Battery rotation in every three months is required and for the purpose job card is provided Milage depends on road conditions, traffic density, tyre pressure, grade battery maintenance style and the O.P. No.1 company has no control over it.

Consumable parts like front and rear brake shoe, all bulbs, tyres, tubes and all plastic/rubber parts, speedometer etc are not covered under warranty. The warranty was up to 13.01.2019.

The O.Ps are not deficient in their service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. Perused the documents filed by the Complainant. The O.Ps have not filed any document. Sai Enterprises issued bill No. 25 dated 13.05.2018 after receiving Rs. 38,090/- from the Complainant for NYX motor cycle. The Complainant acknowledge the receipt on 13.05.2018 receipt of Sheshadev patel dated 18.08.2019, M.D. Kalam, mechanic dated 14.11.2018, copy of users manual, change of tyre from M.D. Kalam garage dated 28.04.2019, complaint to O.P. No.1 dated 20.05.2019.
4. The Complainant purchased the electric vehicle from O.P. No.2 on 13.05.2018. The Complainant acknowledge the receipt in good condition of the product. The Complainant has not pointed out the defects in the receipt and after words made the allegation which is not acceptable.

As per users manual the warranty period of the vehicle is 2 years excluding battery subject to certain terms and conditions. The battery warranty period is for eight months. On 09.06.2019 the battery became swollen and Rs. 4000/- spent by the Complainant. It is beyond the warranty period, hence the Complainant can not claim for the first battery used. The Complainant has not submitted any money receipt for the 2^nd battery and any proof of non-running of the vehicle. Hence contention of the Complainant is simply a bald statement and not acceptable.

The allegation of the Complainant is that the O.Ps are not proving free services to the Complainant. It is the duty of O.Ps that timely free services were paid to that affect necessary documentary evidence should have been filed. Not a single document has been filed, it amounts to deficiency in service. When product is sold by the company timely the parts are if not available certainly the product will be non-functional. The O.P. No.1 is totally silent on free services and availability of parts of the motor cycle.

Relating to mileage of the vehicle it depends on road conditions, traffic density, tyre pressure, grade ability, load, driving style etc. The allegation of the Complainant that the vehicle run 54 Kms instead of 65/70 Kms is not acceptable as the above condition differs from place to place.

In the aforesaid background the following order is made.

6698606.  

The complaint is allowed partly against O.P.No.1. The O.Ps are deficient in service not providing service facility to the customer. For deficiency in service the O.P.No.1 is directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 5000/-. The O.P. NO.1 is directed to inform O.P. No.2 to provide timely free service and paid service with necessary spare parts availability.

Order pronounced in open court on this 27^th day of February,2023.

Supply free copy to the parties.