DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024.
PRESENT : SRI VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT.
: SMT. VIDYA.A., MEMBER.
: SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
Date Of Filing: 01.04.2024.
CC/110/2024
Santhosh.D, Suresh Nivas, - Complainant
Karkkidam kunnu, Alanallur, Palakkad-678 601.
(Party-In-Person)
Vs
1. The Manager, BRE Electric Vehicles LLP, -Opposite Party
68/433, Ground Floor, Jaslu Centre,
Kannur Road, West Hall, Calicut-673 005.
2. Managing Director, Benling India Energy & Technology Pvt. Ltd,
Plot No.291-A, IMT Manesar, Gurugram, Haryana-122 052.
(OP1-case abated)
(OP2-Ex-parte)
ORDER
BY SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
1. Pleadings of the complainant.
The complainant purchased an electric scooter manufactured by the 2nd opposite party from the 1st opposite party dealer on 31.03.2022. The vehicle was delivered by the 1st opposite party on 01.04.2022. According to the complainant, the 2nd opposite party had advertised in various social media platforms promising a mileage of 120 km for a full battery charge. They had also offered 36 months warranty for a battery and 30 months warranty for the motor. Initially, the company (OP1) had offered onsite service but later informed that service will be offered at their service centre at Manjeri.
This complaint is filed with the following allegations:
1. From September, 2022 onwards, the vehicle is giving a mileage of only 50 km per full charge.
2. Repeated calls made to the 1st opposite party went unanswered and subsequentially the numbers were switched off. When visited the 1st opposite party at their given address, it was seen that, the establishment is closed.
3. In January, 2024, the complainant located a temporary service centre at Pavangad, Kozhikode and handed over the battery for service, but they did not provide any service to the products of the 2nd opposite party. The 1st opposite party also was not willing to provide any assistance.
2. The complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. The 2nd opposite party did not enter appearance or file their version in spite of receiving the notice by e-mail. Hence, their name was called in open court and was set ex-parte. Notice to the 1st opposite party was returned undelivered with endorsement “Left”. Hence, notice was sent to the e-mail id of the 1st opposite party provided by the complainant, which was not delivered. So the complainant was directed to take steps for service of notice by paper publication. As the complainant did not take any steps in the matter, the case against the 1st opposite party is abated.
4. The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.A1 to A4 as evidence. Ext.A1 is the tax invoice of the vehicle issued by the 2nd opposite party, Ext.A2 is the insurance policy of the vehicle, Ext.A3 is the RC of the vehicle and Ext.A4 is the copy of the warranty claim sheet issued by the 2nd opposite party.
5. As the case against 1st opposite party is abated and the 2nd opposite party is set ex-parte, this Commission is left with only the proof affidavit and documents marked from the side of the complainant to examine the merit of the case and pass orders accordingly.
6. Ext.A1 is the proof of purchasing the vehicle from the 1st opposite party and Ext.A4 is the receipt issued by the 1st opposite party having accepted the battery on 11.01.2024. As the case against the 1st opposite party is abated and 2nd opposite party being the manufacturer of the vehicle is to be made accountable for providing proper after sale service under warranty terms. Though the complainant has not adduced any evidence regarding the warranty terms and conditions, the acceptance of battery by the 1st opposite party on 11.01.2024 is a clear indication that the complainant is entitled to get the warranty and the 2nd opposite party being the manufacturer is primarily responsible for providing after sale service to the vehicle. Failure to provide proper after sale service to the complainant as per the terms or warranty is a deficiency in service on the part of the 2nd opposite party.
7. In the result, the complaint is allowed ordering the following reliefs:
1) The 2nd opposite party is directed to refund the cost of Electric Scooter Rs.1,10,000/- along with interest @ 10% p.a. from 01.04.2022, till the date of payment.
2) The 2nd opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and resultant mental agony.
3) The 2nd opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
4) On receipt of the above payments, the complainant is directed to return the vehicle to the 2nd opposite party.
The above amounts are to be paid within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which the opposite parties are liable to pay Rs.500/-as solatium per month or part thereof from the date of the order till the date of final payment
Pronounced in open court on this the 19th day of November, 2024.
Sd/-
VINAY MENON .V,
PRESIDENT.
Sd/-
KRISHNANKUTTY N .K,
MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the complainant:
Ext.A1: The copy the tax invoice of the vehicle issued by the 1st opposite party dated 31.03.2022.
Ext.A2: The copy of the insurance policy of the vehicle.
Ext.A3: The copy of RC of the vehicle.
Ext.A4: The copy of the warranty claim sheet issued by the 1st opposite party dated 11.01.2024.
Documents marked from the side of opposite parties: NIL
Witness examined from the complainant’s side: NIL
Witness examined from the opposite parties side: NIL
Cost : 10,000/-.
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.
