Consumer Commission Orders Ola to Refund Over ₹1.03 Lakh in Shivamogga

When consumers face repeated product failures and poor after-sales service, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 empowers them to seek justice. A recent order of the Shivamogga District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission is a strong reminder of this principle.

---

The Case

• Complainant: Sunil Kumar M.S., Medugondanahalli, Channagiri taluk, Davanagere district

• Respondent: Ola Electric Technologies Pvt Ltd

• Case Number: CC/31/2024

• Purchase: Ola electric scooter, September 2023, priced at ₹1,09,999 (with warranty on battery and spare parts)

In October 2023, the scooter developed technical defects. Despite repeated repairs and part replacements by Ola’s Shivamogga service branch, the issues persisted.

Frustrated, the complainant issued a legal notice demanding refund under warranty. With no satisfactory response, he filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging deficiency in service.

---

The Order

The Commission found that Ola failed to rectify the defects during the warranty period, thereby violating the consumer’s rights. The order directed:

• Refund of ₹1,03,413 (purchase amount minus GST)

• 9% annual interest from May 2025 (increasing to 12% if delayed beyond 45 days)

• ₹25,000 as compensation for mental agony

• ₹10,000 as litigation cost

---

Legal Basis Under Consumer Protection Act, 2019

1. Deficiency in Service

   • Section 2(11) defines deficiency as any shortcoming in the quality, nature, or manner of performance required by law or contract.

   • Ola’s failure to provide an effective repair despite warranty obligations amounted to a deficiency.

2. Rights of Consumers

   • Section 2(7) defines a consumer as one who buys goods or services for consideration, not for resale.

   • Section 2(47) defines unfair trade practice which includes misleading warranties or inadequate after-sales service.

3. Relief Available

   • Section 39(1)(c) empowers Consumer Commissions to order refund of the price paid, with interest, when goods are defective or service is deficient.

   • Section 39(1)(d) & (g) allow compensation for loss or injury, including mental agony, and payment of litigation costs.

4. Jurisdiction

   • Under Section 34, District Commissions can hear complaints where the value of goods or services paid is up to ₹50 lakh. This case fell within that limit.

---

Why This Matters

1. Warranty = Legal Assurance – Companies must honor warranties; repeated defects justify refund or replacement.

2. Compensation Beyond Refund – Mental agony and litigation costs are recognized damages.

3. Timely Compliance Enforced – Higher interest for delayed refunds ensures accountability.

4. Consumer-Friendly Framework – The CPA 2019 gives fast-track remedies compared to traditional courts.

---

Takeaway for Consumers

If you face similar issues:

✔️ Keep your purchase invoices, warranty cards, and service records
✔️ Send a legal notice before approaching the forum
✔️ File a complaint in the District Commission (for claims up to ₹50 lakh)
✔️ Demand not only refund but also interest and compensation

The Shivamogga case shows that consumers can effectively enforce their rights under law when companies fail to deliver on their promises.

---

📌 Case Reference: Shivamogga District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, CC/31/2024, Sunil Kumar M.S. v. Ola Electric Technologies Pvt Ltd

#ConsumerRights #OlaElectric #LegalAwareness #PublicRightAction #jagograhakjago