New Delhi | A District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Andhra Pradesh has held Ola Electric guilty of deficiency in service and directed the company to repair an advocate’s electric scooter trunk free of cost and pay ₹45,000 towards compensation and litigation costs. The Commission observed that despite repeatedly acknowledging the defect during the warranty period, the company failed to carry out the necessary repairs.
According to the case, advocate M. Murali Mohan purchased an Ola S1 Pro electric scooter in October 2022. The vehicle was covered under a warranty of 36 months from the date of purchase or 40,000 kilometres, whichever came earlier.
FCRF’s Flagship Cyber Law Certification Returns With a New Four-Week Cohort
The complainant stated that during the warranty period, the scooter’s trunk locking system developed a defect, making it impossible to open or securely lock the storage compartment. He approached Ola’s authorised service centre in Ananthapuramu, where a technician reportedly acknowledged the lock defect and assured him that it would be repaired once the required spare part became available.
However, despite several weeks passing, the repair was not carried out. The complainant revisited the service centre on October 5, 2025, but received the same assurance. On the same day, he also lodged a complaint with Ola Electric via email, which the company acknowledged.
When no action followed, the complainant served a legal notice on October 15, 2025. Despite receiving the notice, the company allegedly failed to repair the vehicle, prompting him to approach the Consumer Commission.
During the proceedings, Ola Electric engaged legal counsel but neither effectively contested the complaint nor filed a written statement within the statutory period of 45 days. Consequently, the Commission proceeded to decide the matter based solely on the evidence produced by the complainant.
The Commission held that the defect had arisen during the warranty period and that the company was contractually obligated to rectify it free of charge. It also noted that Ola’s own technician had acknowledged the defect but the promised repairs were never carried out.
The order further observed that the complainant, being an advocate, required a functional trunk to securely carry case-related documents and that the unresolved defect adversely affected his professional work. The Commission also noted that the scooter could only be repaired by the company’s authorised technicians using genuine spare parts, making Ola solely responsible for resolving the issue.
Accordingly, the Commission directed Ola Electric and its Ananthapuramu service centre to jointly repair the defective trunk free of cost within 45 days. It also awarded ₹20,000 as compensation for deficiency in service, ₹20,000 for mental agony and ₹5,000 towards litigation costs, taking the total compensation to ₹45,000.
The Commission further ruled that if the company fails to comply within 45 days, it must replace the defective trunk with a new one and pay the compensation amount along with interest at the rate of 7 per cent per annum from the date of the order until payment.
