“It is further proved from un-challenged testimony of the complainant that on January 13, 2024, one of the replaced li-ion battery was again found defective… but the OPs failed and neglected to replace the said li-ion defective battery…The deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties (Hero, dealer) is proved as they have failed and neglected to replace the said battery which was under warranty on January 13, 2024 when it was handed over to the OPs for replacement,” the May 18 order read.

‘Faulty battery’

• On February 5, 2022, the man purchased an electric scooter from Hero Electric Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. for Rs 81,240.
• The e-bike had two lithium-ion battery sets, which jointly could cover a distance of 120 km when fully charged.
• At the time of purchase of the e-bike, the man was assured by the company that the batteries had a replacement warranty of three years from the date of purchase, which is till February 4, 2025.
• After purchasing the e-bike, the man started using it according to the procedure, manual, instructions, and guide supplied by the company.
• The man punctually and diligently got his e-bike serviced from the dealer store within the deadlines as given in the warranty manual.
• Sometime in April 2023, both sets of lithium-ion batteries were found to be defective and after being satisfied with the results of all tests conducted on the defective batteries, the company agreed to replace the lithium-ion batteries.
• As guided by the company, the man surrendered both defective batteries to the dealer for replacement, and he was handed a temporary battery by the dealer to run the e-bike.
• On December 14, 2023, the man got a replacement of the said two lithium-ion batteries, and while the man was using the bike with the new batteries.
• One of the replaced batteries was again found to be defective, and according to the instructions of the company, the man again surrendered the said battery to the dealers for replacement on January 13, 2024.
• The man was promised by the company that new lithium-ion battery sets would be provided within one month.
• Subsequently, the other replaced lithium-ion battery was also found to be defective, and a replacement, though provided within a reasonable time, was also found to be defective.
• After handing over the defective battery set for replacement on January 13, 2024, the man kept chasing the company, however his grievances were not resolved.
• Since January, 2024, the man had been running the e-bike on one battery set, and due to over usage, the other battery set had also lost almost one year of fuel life and thereby had become defective too.
• Due to over usage, the other battery set was providing a mileage of 45 km per charge instead of 60 km per charge.
• The man finally issued a legal notice to the company on October 24, 2024, and requested that they correct the defect in service.
• The company did not give any reply to the notice, and hence the man approached the consumer commission.

‘3-year warranty’

The Kolkata district commission observed that since the man had purchased an e-bike from the dealer, which was manufactured by the company on payment of consideration, the man fell within the ambit of a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

The commission noted that it was proven that the man had purchased an e-bike from the dealers, and the same was under warranty for three years, along with a three-year warranty on lithium-ion batteries when used for personal use.

It was also proved that the man used the e-bike, got it serviced by dealers from time to time, and both battery sets were found defective and were replaced by the company.

It is further proved that the replaced battery was again found defective and was handed over to the company, but they failed and neglected to replace the said battery with a new one as per the terms of the warranty.

The commission, however, also stated that, without any evidence, it was not established that, because of use of one battery, it had lost one year of fuel life due to its single use as claimed by the man.

The commission finally held that the deficiency in service on the part of the company was proved as they had failed and neglected to replace the battery, which was under warranty on the date when it was handed over to the company for replacement.

Accordingly, the commission allowed the complaint ex parte and ordered the company and the dealer to provide a replacement of the lithium-ion battery to the man and also further directed to pay compensation of Rs 10,000 along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000 to the man.

The commission also ordered that if the company and the dealers failed to replace the battery, they would have to pay Rs 20,000 to the man as a probable cost of the battery.

‘Significance’

The ruling establishes the obligation of the companies to provide replacement and other essential services for faults automobile and the fact that the parts must be promptly replaced or repaired without hassle if they vehicle is in warranty period.

Accordingly, the products must be examined carefully by the consumers while and after buying the same in order to check them for possible defects.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact consumer helpline in their respective states (West Bengal helpline: 033-2479-3078) or call the National Consumer Helpline on 1915 for assistance.