Recurring Brake Issues In E-Cycle As Manufacturing Defect, Bangalore Commission Holds Hero Lectro Liable
Recently, the III Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising of Shivarama K (President) and Chandrashekhar S Noola (Member) held Hero Lectro (Division of Hero Cycles Ltd.) liable of deficiency in service for manufacturing defect in an e-cycle purchased by the complainant. The bench noted that despite raising complaints and efforts...
Recently, the III Additional Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising of Shivarama K (President) and Chandrashekhar S Noola (Member) held Hero Lectro (Division of Hero Cycles Ltd.) liable of deficiency in service for manufacturing defect in an e-cycle purchased by the complainant. The bench noted that despite raising complaints and efforts at repair by the complainant, the defect still persisted, therefore, the recurring nature of the defect indicated a manufacturing defect.
Brief Facts of the Case:
Sri R.G Rammohan (“Complainant”), on the 25th of August 2021 purchased a Hero Lectro E-Cycle from Cycle World - JP Nagar and made a payment of Rs. 50,000. Subsequently, in November 2021, which was only a few months after the purchase, the complainant encountered issues with the E-Cycle's brakes and brought the matter to the attention of Hero Lectro.
Initially, the Complainant initiated proceedings by filing a complaint (bearing no. CC No.32/2022) before the III Additional Bangalore Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“District Commission”). However, this complaint was later closed on the 18th of April 2022, following the complainant's submission that Hero had repaired the electrical bicycle, and at that time, there were no issues with it. Despite the resolution, the complainant asserted that the brake problems persisted, prompting him to contact Hero's technician for assistance. These repair attempts were made twice but without success. Following these efforts, Hero declined to provide further assistance, leading the complainant to file the compliant again before the District Commission.
The complainant argued that a manufacturing defect was present in the e-cycle, which was evident from the recurring brake issues. He maintained that despite raising complaints and efforts at repair, the problem continued to persist, rendering the bicycle unusable. Consequently, the complainant demanded a refund of the purchase amount, which stood at Rs. 49,143/-.
As opposed to this, Hero Lectro asserted that they had acted in good faith and had endeavoured to address the complainant's concerns by replacing the brake set and providing a satisfaction letter. They contended that the complainant's demands were unreasonable, and they highlighted that the warranty policy did not encompass brake-related issues.
Observations by the Commission:
The District Commission noted that the complainant had repeatedly raised brake-related complaints, which persisted despite attempted repairs. Hero Lectro acknowledged these complaints and provided service on multiple occasions. The District Commission concluded that the recurring nature of the brake issues indicated a manufacturing defect in the e-cycle, as Hero Lectro was unable to satisfactorily resolve the problem. Consequently, the District Commission found deficiency of service on the part of Hero Lectro.
Therefore, the District Commission held Hero Lectro and Cycle World (the seller) jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainant, along with Rs. 5,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation costs.
Case: R.G. Rammohan vs Hero Lectro
Case No.: CC/166/2022
Advocate for the Complainant: V Pratap Kumar
Advocate for the Respondent: Meghna Ravindranath
Click Here To Read/Download Order