Ola Electric ordered to refund Rs 1.34 lakh and pay another Rs 1 lakh in compensation and legal costs after failing to deliver Roadster X Plus bike despite receiving full payment

A district consumer commission in Andhra Pradesh has directed Ola Electric to refund Rs 1,34,161 to a customer after finding deficiency in service over its failure to deliver an electric motorcycle for several months despite receiving the full payment. The commission also awarded Rs 90,000 for loss of livelihood, mental agony and inconvenience, along with Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs. The order was passed on August 31, 2026, reported TOI.

Why did the customer approach the commission?

According to the commission order, the customer booked an Ola Roadster X Plus electric vehicle and paid the full amount of Rs 1,34,161 on October 2, 2025. The vehicle was scheduled for delivery on October 23, but was not delivered even after several months.

The customer said he repeatedly contacted Ola through emails, customer support and its grievance mechanism and also approached the National Consumer Helpline. However, he alleged that the company failed to take effective steps to deliver the vehicle.


He also claimed that the vehicle was registered through OTP on December 31, 2025, despite him not having received physical possession. He later received communication about the registration certificate, but the vehicle was still not delivered.

The customer told the commission that he was unemployed and had planned to use the vehicle to earn a livelihood through ride-service platforms such as Rapido. He said he had borrowed money at a high rate of interest to arrange the purchase amount and suffered financial hardship because of the delay.

He also pointed out that the price of the same model had increased to Rs 2,48,090, causing him further financial loss.

Ola opposed the complaint, arguing that the promised delivery date was only indicative and not binding. It said delivery depended on vehicle availability and completion of government and regulatory formalities.

What did the commission find about the delayed delivery?

The bench comprising President Karanam Kishore Kumar and member S Nazima Kausar noted that there was no dispute that the customer had paid the entire amount and that the transaction had progressed to vehicle preparation and document verification.

The commission found that the customer had repeatedly followed up regarding the non-delivery, while Ola failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence explaining why the vehicle could not be delivered for several months.

The commission said an estimated delivery date could allow some flexibility, but could not be used to justify an indefinite delay after the consumer had paid the entire amount.

“An estimated delivery date may permit reasonable operational flexibility, but it cannot confer an unrestricted right upon the service provider to retain the consumer's entire consideration for several months without either delivering the vehicle or providing a satisfactory explanation for the delay,” the commission held.

It further found that Ola had not produced convincing material showing any specific regulatory, manufacturing, transportation or other obstacle that prevented timely delivery.

“A general reference to operational issues or governmental formalities cannot justify a delay of several months,” the commission said.

The commission also rejected the argument that registration and insurance of the vehicle amounted to delivery, noting that physical possession was the essential purpose of the transaction.

“Registration and insurance are distinct from physical delivery and possession, which were the essential purpose of the transaction,” it held.

What did the commission order Ola Electric to pay?

The commission concluded that Ola had committed deficiency in service by receiving the entire consideration but failing to deliver the vehicle within a reasonable period.

It directed the company to refund the full Rs 1,34,161 with 12% annual interest from October 2, 2025, until payment.

The commission also awarded Rs 90,000 towards loss of livelihood, mental agony, inconvenience, harassment and consequential financial prejudice, taking into account the customer's intended use of the vehicle for earning a livelihood and the prolonged delay.

Ola was further directed to pay Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs.

The amounts have to be paid within 45 days of receipt of the order.