Haryana

Kurukshetra

127/2018

Harbans Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

ADC - Opp.Party(s)

Ashwani Goel

24 Sep 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint No.127 of 2018.

Date of instt. 04.06.2018. 

                                                                       Date of Decision: 24.09.2019.

 

Harbans Singh s/o Shri Ram Lal, r/o H.No.474, Ward No.2, Gurunanak Colony, Gali No.18, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

 

                                                                ……….Complainant.      

                                            Versus

 

1. Addl. Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chief Project Officer, New & Renewable Energy Deptt. Kurukshetra through its Authorized Official.
2. M/s Andy Solar Pvt. Ltd., DSS-90, 1^st Floor, Sector-12, Panchkula through its authorized signatory.
3. Rhine Solar Ltd., Corporate Officer A-75/4, 2^nd Floor, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi through its authorized signatory.
4. Ankur Distributor Sunshine Solar, Ambala-14, New Model Colony, behind old Session Courts, Ambala City through its authorized signatory.
5. UHBVNL-K-21, Pehowa through SDO, Pehowa.

 

        ………Opposite parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member.       

                   Sh. Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member                                                      

Present:     Shri Ashwani Goel, Advocate for the complainant.           

                Shri Mukesh Sharma, ADA for the opposite party No.1.

Shri S.C. Saini, Advocate for the opposite party No.5.

Opposite Parties No.2 to 4 ex-parte.

           

ORDER

                                                                         

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Harbans Singh against ADC and others, the opposite parties.

2.             The brief facts of the complaint are that as per directions of the Government of Haryana, in the year 2017, the complainant moved an application for installing the solar system in his House No.474, Ward No.2, Gurunanak Colony, Gali No.18, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra to OPs No.1, who allowed the application vide letter No.296-299 dated 11.07.2017 and gave direction to him to install the solar system. He contacted the OP No.4, who came at his house and told the procedure about installing the solar system and demanded advance of Rs.1,00,000/- which was given to him through cheque No.823903 dated 02.02.2017 of PNB, branch at Pehowa. After that, Rs.1,00,000/- was given through RTGS on 18.02.2017; Rs.50,000/- in cash and Rs.50,000/- was taken by the OP No.4 by saying that amount was deposited in the department and got receipt later on. Finally, when the OP No.4 came at the house of the complainant alongwith solar system material in tempo and he received an amount of Rs.50,000/- cash and Rs.3600/- as rent of tempo. The OP No.4 installed the solar meter. Before installing the solar system, expenses of meter of Rs.3088/- were paid by the complainant vide receipt No.5701641045071, Consumer I.D. No.9716410000 dated 15.02.2017 from UHBVNL. The complainant paid electricity bill for Rs.25,064/- dated 20.04.2018 vide receipt No.780811357200 with consumer I.D. 7808113524 regarding the solar meter. At the time of installing the system, all the OPs assured to him that they will install the solar system of good quality and also gave the benefit of subsidy within three months. After installation of the solar system, the complainant moved an application on dated 01.07.2017 to OP No.1, but he denied to give the subsidy amount by saying that in District Kurukshetra, they have not given the subsidy amount as per terms & conditions, as the solar system of the complainant is less than 4 kilowatt, but in actual the solar system was passed by the OP No.1 and installed by OP No.4. The OPs have played fraud with him as they have not installed the solar system for 4 kilowatt and have also not given the subsidy amount to him. On 08.05.2018, he moved an application to OP No.4 for checking of solar system, but the OP had not checked the same and issued a letter dated 09.05.2018 stating therein regarding some technical faults and also stated that it is the liability of the guarantor and warrantor and also assured that they will rectify the defect within seven to ten days. The complainant contacted visited the office of OPs so many times and requested to give the subsidy amount, but they always postponed the maters on one pretext or the others. In this way, the OPs are deficient in providing the services. Hence, this complaint.

3.             Upon notice, the opposite party No.1 appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; locus-standi; cause of action and jurisdiction. It is further stated that OP No.1 received online proposal for installation of 4 KW Grid Connected rooftop (GCRT) Solar Power plant at the residence of the complainant. The New and Renewable Energy Department, Kurukshetra had issued online sanction for installation of 4 KW Grid Connected Roof Top (GCRT) Solar Power Plant at the residence of the complainant, as per guidelines, but the complainant had installed 3 KW Grid Connected Roof Top (GCRT) Solar Power Plant. The OP No.1 is nowhere in picture to place the work order of installation of 4 KW or 3 KW Solar Power Plant at the house of the complainant. It is the whole responsibility of the beneficiary i.e. complainant to install the Grid Connected Solar Power Plant as per specification issued by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), GOI, Delhi/New & Renewable Energy Department, Haryana. The OP No.1 has no role to place the work order or release of any payment to the supplier for the installation of this Solar Power Plant. It is the choice of the beneficiary i.e. complainant to select any supplier from the list of Channel Partner of MNRE, Delhi. The department of New & Renewable Energy, Haryana will release the subsidy of amounting of Rs.20,000/- per Kilo Watt or 30% of the total cost of the system, whichever is less after submitting the complete document online on the web portal. The complainant was informed by the OP No.1 time to time through web portal to complete document, but till date, documents were not completed on the web portal. The subsidy will be released to the beneficiary/complainant after the completion of all the documents on the web portal online and the complainant has filed this false and frivolous complaint with a malafide motive to get undue advantages. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP No.1. The rest of the allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed dismissal the same with heavy costs.

                Upon notice, the opposite party No.5 appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; cause of action; jurisdiction and complaint is barred for non-joinder & mis-joinder of necessary parties. It is further stated that the complainant has concealed the true facts. The complainant moved application for the installation of net meter for solar plant rooftop solar photovoltaic system of capacity 3 KW. The complainant had deposited the processing fees amounting Rs.1100/- vide BA 16 No.297/103309 dated 18.02.2017. The following charges, documents and equipment for release of net metering connection as per site verification be accepted dated 14.02.2017 and S.J.O. issued dated 23.02.2017 for installation of rooftop solar photovoltaic system under net metering arrangement. The complainant has filed the present complaint on the basis of false and frivolous grounds with a view to harass the OP No.5. The rest of the allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed dismissal the same with heavy costs.

                  Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the OPs No.2 & 3 before this Forum, accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 20.07.2018. Initially, OP No.4 appeared in person on 20.07.2018, but on 26.09.2018, none appeared on behalf of the OP No.4 before this Forum, accordingly, he was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 26.09.2018.

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure A to Annexure K and closed the evidence. On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No. 1 tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A and closed the evidence. The learned counsel for the OP No.5 tendered affidavit Ex.RW5/A alongwith documents Ex.D-1 to D-4 and closed the evidence.

5.             We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant installed a solar system in his house through OPs and paid Rs.3,00,000/- including other charges. He further argued that the said solar system became defective within guarantee/warranty period and in this regard, the complainant moved an application to OP No.4, but he had not checked the same and issued a letter dated 09.05.2018 stating therein regarding some technical faults. He also assured that they will rectify the defect within seven to ten days, but they did not do so. He further argued that the OPs No.2 to 4 be directed to remove the defective solar system from the premises of the complainant and be directed to refund the entire amount of Rs.3,00,000/- alongwith interest.

                The learned ADA for the OP No.1has argued that OP No.1 received online proposal for installation of 4 KW Grid Connected rooftop (GCRT) Solar Power plant at the residence of the complainant, but the complainant had installed 3 KW Grid Connected Roof Top (GCRT) Solar Power Plant. The OP No.1 is nowhere in picture to place the work order of installation of 4 KW or 3 KW Solar Power Plant at the house of the complainant. It is the whole responsibility of the beneficiary i.e. complainant to install the Grid Connected Solar Power Plant as per specification issued by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), GOI, Delhi/New & Renewable Energy Department, Haryana. The OP No.1 has no role to place the work order or release of any payment to the supplier for the installation of this Solar Power Plant. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP No.1.

                The learned counsel for the OP No.5 has argued that the complainant moved application for the installation of net meter for solar plant rooftop solar photovoltaic system of capacity 3 KW by depositing processing fees of Rs.1100/- vide BA 16 No.297/103309 dated 18.02.2017. The charges, documents and equipment for release of net metering connection as per site verification be accepted dated 14.02.2017 and S.J.O. issued dated 23.02.2017 for installation of rooftop solar photovoltaic system under net metering arrangement. The complainant has filed the present complaint on the basis of false and frivolous grounds with a view to harass the OP No.5.

7.             Admittedly, the complainant purchased Grid Solar Power Plant by paying a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- vide Tax Invoice dated 12.03.2017 Annexure-C through OP No.2 with five years guarantee/warranty, as is evident from Warranty Certificate (Annexure D) issued by OP No.3 and Warranty/Guarantee and Declaration dated 12.03.2017 (Annexure-G) issued by OP No.2. As per complainant, the said Solar Plant became defective within guarantee/warranty period and he moved an application to OP No.4 in this regard, upon which, the OP No.4 also assured the complainant vide letter Annexure-A that they have received the letter of the complainant dated 08.05.2018 and they will rectify the complaint within seven to ten days, if they found any technical defect in it, but they did not remove the defect of it. From the above facts, it is clear that grievance of the complainant is only with regard to OPs No.2 to 4. To support his case, the complainant produced his affidavit as Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure A to Annexure K, whereas, no one on behalf of OPs No.2 to 4 have appeared before this Forum to rebut the above-said version of the complainant as they were proceeded against ex-parte. So, the evidence adduced by the complainant goes unrebutted and unchallenged against OPs No.2 to 4 and thus, we have no option, but to accept the version of the complainant against OPs No.2 to 4, which is duly supported by his affidavit and other supporting document. Since there are no specific allegations of the complainant against the OP No.1 and performa OP No.5 and even they have no role to play in the dispute, therefore, complaint against OP No.1 and performa OP No.5 is dismissed. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the Solar System in question of the complainant became defective within guarantee/warrantee period from its purchase and OPs No.2 to 4 have failed to resolve the grievances of the complainant, hence, the OPs No.2 to 4 are deficient while rendering services to the complainant.   

8.             In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby dismiss the complaint against OPs No.1 and 5 and allow the same against the OPs No.2 to 4 and direct them in the following manner:-

1. To remove the Solar System in question from the premises of the complainant and to refund the amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, i.e. the price of the Solar System.
2. To pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.
3. To pay Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

                The OPs No.2 to 4 are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions jointly and severally within the period of 45 days from the date of communication of this order, failing which, the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum for the period of default and the penal action under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, would also be initiated against the OPs No.2 to 4. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.:24.09.2019.                                                   (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Neelam)       

Member                             Member.