Orissa

Debagarh

CC/32/2020

Chittaranjan Pradhan, age 40 years, S/O-Late Kshyamanidhi Pradhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Ajit Kumar Nanda, Okinava Bike Sub-Dealer - Opp.Party(s)

10 Dec 2021

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION, DEOGARH.

C.C NO-32/2020

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Arati Das, Member.

Chittaranjan Pradhan, age 40 years,

S/O-Late Kshyamanidhi Pradhan,

At/P.O-Ballam,P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                              …. Complainant.

                                                                        Vrs.

1. Sri Ajit Kumar Nanda,

          Okinava Bike Sub-Dealer,

          At/-Rajamunda, PO/PS/Dist-Deogarh.

2.   M/S Panda Motors,

            Okinava Bike Dealer,

            Panchgachia Chowk,P.o-Baraipali,

            PS/Dist-Sambalpur.

     3.    The Manufacturer,

            Okinawa Autotech Pvt. Ltd

             Unit No. 119, 1st Floor, JMD Megapolis, Sector 48,

             Sohna Road, Gurugram, Haryana, 122018, India.                           ….O.Ps

Counsels:-

For the Complainant             :- Self

For the O.P-1, 2 & 3              :- None.

                                                               Date of Hearing: 05.11.2021, Date of Order: 10.12.2021

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA,PRESIDENT:-Brief facts of the case is that, the Complainant on dt. 24.09.2018 has purchased a new OKINAVA PRAISE Electric Scooter (Glossy Red Black) from the O.P-1 having Chassis No-M5WBDGBCJJ1104918 and Engine No- BDG104918. He has paid Rs. 82,000/- to the O.P-1 in cash towards the payment of the Scooter including the registration fees, Insurance premium and Pollution papers. The O.P-1 brought the said Scooter from the O.P-2 and delivered the same at a place near Private Bus Stand where a temporary exhibition/sale counter was installed during Ganesh Puja-2018 but he has not handed over the Insurance and other related paper like Tax Invoice to the Complainant. The Complainant got the Scooter is registered vide No. OD-28-A-0882 on dtd. 26.10.2018 and the Insurance is valid up to dtd.29.09.2019. On dtd.15.08.2019 morning, as the Scooter did not start at all after several attempts and smoke was coming out from the engine and he consulted with the O.P-1 to provide necessary technical services. He as per the direction of O.P-1 took the Scooter to his medicine shop at Kandhal where the O.P-1 attend the call with a mechanic and suggested that the connector switch is defective. On dtd.25.02.2020, the O.P-1 replaced the defective switch after two-three months and he suggested that the rear wheel has got jammed and the Complainant shift the Scooter to the TVS Showroom of the O.P-1 at Deogarh by towing.  Again on dtd. 24.06.2020 the Complainant requested to the O.P-1 to solve the problems through expert mechanics and handover the Scooter to him but the O.P-1 became aggrieved on the request of the Complainant and denied to listen anything rather neglected him. Now the complainant has lost faith on the Scooter as from the beginning it is showing problems and he sustained financial loss, mental pain and agony due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice caused by the O.Ps as the Scooter is lying with the O.P.1.

     The O.P-1, 2 & 3 despite of service of notice they did not bother to appear and file written statements to their defense before this Commission thus challenging the allegations made by the Complainant. So taking it in to consideration as “IT IS A YEAR OLD CASE”, this Commission has rightly decided to dispose off the case on merit basis considering the Complaint petition filed by the Complainant.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has purchased a new OKINAVA PRAISE Electric Scooter from the O.P-2 a dealer at Sambalpur through the O.P-1 at Deogarh, on dtd. 24.09.2018 on payment of consideration. The Complainant run the said Scooter for very short period of one month. After 11 months of purchase, the vehicle started defects in the Engine giving abnormal emission of smoke which was immediately brought to the notice of the opposite parties. Even after repairs, the Complainant had to take the vehicle several times for curing the defects for one after the other. At the time the O.P-2 told that the rear wheel has got jammed which needs to replaced. This was taken out by the service engineers of the opposite parties which do not warrant any technical expertise. This matter was not denied by the O.Ps at any time. The complainant had to approach the O.Ps service station several times which is evident from the job card itself. The complainant is not in a position to use the vehicle properly and the complainant incurred financial loss and he had to suffer mental agony also. An observation was made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Philips Mampillil vrs. Premier Automobile Limited  and Anr. On 27 th January 2004 that if the vehicle is sent for repair time and again and cannot be repaired there is no need further expert opinion for declaring manufacturing defect. Supreme Court of India In the case of “Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vrs. Susheel Kumar Gobagitra  and another (2006) 4SCC 644” has held that “where defects in various parts of a Car are established ,direction for replacement of the car would not be justified. Replacement of the entire item or replacement of defective parts are called for”.  In the case of “Surendra Kumar Jain  Vrs. R.C Bhargaba  & others {III(2006)CPJ 382(NC)” the radiator was found to be leaking from the bottom tank and had been replaced , this commission  had taken the view that  “minor defects cannot be said to be manufacturing defect”. Hence the O.Ps are deficient in providing necessary after sale services and are liable to replace the Engine of the Bullet and we order as under:-

                                                                                                  ORDER

The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.Ps are directed to replace all the defective Parts of the Scooty and provide him all defect free parts to make the Scooty roadworthy. The O.Ps are further directed to pay Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) towards the cost of litigation. All the above orders are to be carried out within 30 (Thirty) days of receiving of this order, failing which, the complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.  

Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 10^th  day of December-2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

I agree,                                                                                             

 

MEMBER(W).                                                                                               PRESIDENT.

                                                      Dictated and Corrected

                                                                      By me.

 

              PREIDENT