Sk. Ezaz Quadri, aged about 26 years - Complainant(s)


M/s. Tarnquil Motors (Authorised Dealer of Twenty Two Motors Pvt. Ltd.) Represented by its Authorise - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Gopinath Dash& Others

21 Nov 2023


Complaint Case No. CC/31/2023
( Date of Filing : 14 Feb 2023 )
1. Sk. Ezaz Quadri, aged about 26 years
S/o:-Sk. Rahim Bux, At:- Kazi Mohala, Po/P.S:- Puruna Bazar, Dist:-Bhadrak, Odisha.
1. M/s. Tarnquil Motors (Authorised Dealer of Twenty Two Motors Pvt. Ltd.) Represented by its Authorised Officer
Plot No.18/118/3229,18/ 180//3220,18/1180,18/1181, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, Pin-751030.
2. Bounce Infinity represented by its Competent Authority
1201-1206, 12th Floor, Spaze Plazo, Sector-69, Haryana.
Dated : 21 Nov 2023
Final Order / Judgement


Consumer Complaint No. 31 of 2023.

                                                                                                                                           Date of hearing     :   26.09.2023.

Date of order                 :   21.11.2023.

Dated the 21st day of November 2023.

          Sk. Ezaz Quadri, aged about 26 years, S/o:- Sk. Rahim Bux,

                   At:- Kazi Mohala, Po/P.S:- Puruna Bazar, Dist:- Bhadrak.

                                                                                                       …………..  Complainant.


  1. M/s. Tarnquil Motors (Authorized Dealer of

        Twenty two Motors Pvt. Ltd.) Represented by its

        Authorized Officer, Plot No.18/118/3229, 18/180/

       3220, 18/1180, 18/1181, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar,

       Dist:- Khurda, Odisha, Pin-751030.

  1. Bounce Infinity represented by its Competent Authority,

         1201-1206, 12th Floor, Spaze Plazo, Sector-69, Haryana.

                                                                                                     .…………Opposite parties.

P R E S E N T S.

          1.  Sri Shiba Prasad Mohanty, President,

          2.  Smt. Madhusmita Swain, Member.

                   Counsels appeared for the parties.

For the Complainant :  Mr. Gopinath Dash, Advocate & Associate,

For the Opp. Parties  :  None.

                                                J U D G M E N T.


          In the matter of an application filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the Opposite Parties under Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

          Brief facts of the case is that, the complainant influenced by advertisement in India Post i.e. in online mode that the Electronics Scooter manufactured by Bounce Infinity i.e. O.P.No.2, that the electric vehicle run 90 k.m. once its battery is charged for four hours and its mileage is 65 k.ms/p.h. Complainant purchased the Electric Scooter of Bounce Infinity from the O.P.No.1 who is authorized dealer of Manufacturing Company of O.P.No.2 of Rs.1,00,500 vide MR No. 006 on 14.09.2022.  After riding the electric scooter complainant found that mileage of scooter is 40 to 45 k.m/h and it covers only 45 k.m. once the battery is fully charged which is far from the advertisement. After few months complainant face starting problem in the electric scooter & at the time of running the body parts of electric scooter started cracking. The complainant has informed the O.P.No.1 all the defects of electric scooter and the O.P.No.1 assured him that their authorized mechanic solved the problem. The mechanic of the O.P.No.1 checked the electric scooter but the defect is not short out. On 28.12.2022 complainant sent a legal notice to O.P.No.1 by registered post but the O.P. has not given any answer to it. Hence, this complaint.

          Notice was issued to O.Ps on 14.07.2023. Notice was served sufficient and notice is delivered on 18.07.2023 O.P.No.1 as per tracking report. But the O.Ps neither appear nor submit any written version before this commission. So the O.Ps are set ex-parte vide order No.8, dtd.01.09.2023.  Following issues are framed for fare adjudication of the consumer complaint.


  1. Whether the complainant is a consumer or not ?
  2. Whether the case vehicle suffers from fault, imperfections, and short coming in its quality & potential ?
  3. Whether the complainant has informed the O.Ps about the short

in the said vehicle ?

  1. Whether the O.P. has committed unfair trade practice & deficiency in service ?
  2. If so and what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

Issue No.1.

So far as Issue No.1 is concerned the complainant has filed original Money Receipt of the O.P. vide M.R. No. 006, dtd.14.09.2022 of amount Rs.1,00,500/-. He has also filed the online pages displayed in the website by the O.P., so it is beyond any doubt that complainant has paid consideration and purchased the white colour of electric scooter of O.P.

Issue No.1 is answered in automatic and it is in favour of complainant.

Issue No.2.

 The online pages displayed by the O.Ps in the designated portal says that the range of vehicle when fully charged is 85 but in actually used by the complainant the scooter only covers 40-45 km. So it is definitely a fault and short          of the vehicle. The vehicle is also lags much below than the advertise to speed of 65 km/hour and the vehicle vibrate too much while moving. All the above are definitely imperfection and short       in the quality, potency and standard of the vehicle.

Thus Issue No.2 is answered in favour of complainant.

Issue No.3.

As per the materials available in record, the complainant informed these O.Ps about the short       in the vehicle time and again. In a further sent a legal notice through his lawyer by registered post on 28.12.2022 but these O.Ps preferred not to answer the complainant or to his lawyer.

Thus Issue No.3 is answered in favour of complainant.

Issue No.4.

These O.Ps have willfully sold a vehicle which has inherent fault, imperfection & short     to the complainant even after duly informing the O.Ps they did not rectify the short       and even did not reply to the advocate notice to the complainant. So it is crystal clear in days light that these O.Ps have committed not only unfair trade practice but also deficiency in service.

The complainant has possess the vehicle on 14.09.2022 and informed about the defects to the O.Ps in the same month thereafter he has given legal notice on 28.12.2022. It is clear that the complainant could not use and enjoy the vehicle even after expending more than lakhs of rupees. The complainant needs to be compensated in full as he has not use the vehicle peacefully for even a month.

O R D E R.

In the result, the complaint be & same is allowed. The  O.Ps  are directed to replace the Electric Scooter of the complainant of Bounce Infinity E1 White Colour electric scooter with a new one of higher model or in alternative refund the amount of Rs.1,00,500/- to the complainant within the 30 days from the date of receipt of order. In the event these O.Ps secured to replace the vehicle or refund the amount then they shall pay the amount along with 6 % interest till the date they actually make payment to the complainant.

This order is pronounced in the open Court on this the 21st day of November 2023 under my hand and seal of the Commission.


Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!


Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number


Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.