Sethi Bone and Joint Care Centre filed a consumer case on 25 Apr 2023 against Adcance Sunrise solar systems in the Faridkot Consumer Court. The case no is CC/21/21 and the judgment uploaded on 11 May 2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FARIDKOT
C. C. No. : 21 of 2021
Date of Institution : 22.01.2021
Date of Decision : 25.04.2023
Sethi Bone & Joint Care Centre through Proprietor/owner Dr. Kanwal Sethi son of Arvind Kumar, Prem Nagar NH-15, Kotkapura, Punjab.
.....Complainant
Versus
....Opposite Parties(Ops)
Complaint under Section 35 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Quorum: Smt Priti Malhotra, President,
Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member,
Sh Vishav Kant Garg, Member.
* * * * * * * * *
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
Present: Sh Sunil Chawla, Ld Counsel for complainant,
OPs Exparte.
ORDER
(Priti Malhotra, President)
Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against Ops seeking directions to Ops to pay Rs.1,35,026/-for purchasing additional goods to complete the leftover work, to pay Rs.15,000/-as labour charges, loss of rebate, loss of Rs. 69,120/-per electricity unit and for further directing OPs to pay Rs.50,000/-as compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by him and Rs.15,000/-as cost of litigation.
2 Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant is a doctor and he runs a hospital for earning his livelihood. It is submitted that OP-2 approached complainant and proposed for installation of Solar System and allured him saying he has installed Solar Systems in several companies and have been dealing with big ventures. For the purpose of installation of solar system of module 250-335 WP Multicrystalline or rating as per site 1EC certified 9 at the rate of Rs.4,40,000/-, complainant paid Rs.1 lac through cheque no.790664 dated 09.07.2019, Rs. 2 lacs through cheque no.790666 dated 27.09.2019 and Rs.50,000/-in cash against proper receipt, but
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
after receiving the amount, OP-2 and OP-3stopped attending the phone calls of complainant on one pretext or the other and even they stopped replying to messages sent by complainant regarding installation of said solar system. OPs cheated complainant by misrepresenting themselves to be Managing Director of the Firm though their firm is not a limited firm and is not even registered. Thereafter, for the installation of said solar system, complainant had to engage a person to whom he paid Rs.15,000/-as labour charges and even he had to purchase additional goods required for the installation of said solar system and he was made to pay Rs.1,35,026/-for those goods. Thus, in this way, complainant had to incur additional expenditure for goods required for installation of solar system and had also to pay labour charges for no fault on his part. Even legal notice issued by complainant served no purpose. OPs have cheated the complainant and despite several requests did not pay any heed to his genuine requests to redress his grievance. Complainant has claimed that he has suffered huge harassment and mental tension due to this act of OPs, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs. Complainant has prayed for seeking direction to Ops to pay compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by him alongwith Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the complaint.
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
3 The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 27.01.2021, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.
4 Notices containing copy of complaint alongwith relevant documents were sent to OPs through registered posts, but all these returned with report of postal authorities “Insufficient Address and Shop Closed”. Thereafter, on application filed by complainant through counsel, publication regarding said notice of complaint was made, but despite publication, nobody appeared in this Commission on behalf of OPs either in person or through counsel on date fixed. Case was called out several times since morning till 4 O’clock, but OPs did not make presence in this Commission nor bothered to file reply in person or through any representative. Therefore, vide order dated 17.11.2021, OPs were proceeded against exparte.
5 As OPs are exparte, therefore, proper opportunities were given to complainant to lead evidence to prove its pleadings. Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex CW-1/A and documents ExC-1 to Ex C-13 and then, closed the same on behalf of complainant.
cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
6 As there is no rebuttal from Ops side, therefore, ld counsel for complainant addressed exparte arguments. We have heard the ld counsel for complainant and have carefully gone through the evidence and documents produced by complainant party.
7 It is well proved on the record that complainant purchased Solar system worth Rs.4,40,000/- from OPs and paid Rs.3 lacs through cheques and Rs.50,000/-in cash against proper receipt, but after receiving the amount, OPs stopped attending his calls and even did not reply to messages sent by him in this regard. Despite several requests through messages, OPs did not bother to pay any heed to his requests and then, complainant got installed the said solar system from some outer mechanic and for installation of same, he had to purchase required material for Rs.1,35,026/- and had to pay Rs.15,000/-as labour charges to said mechanic. OPs cheated complainant and did not keep its word. It was duty of Ops to provide requisite material mandatory for installation of solar system and it was their prime duty to install the same, but OPs failed to render services as agreed by them. Legal notice sent also served no purpose. Grievance of the complainant is that despite several requests made by complainant to Ops to do the needful, bore no fruit and complainant has suffered huge harassment and mental tension due to this act of OPs, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs.
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
Prayer for accepting the present complaint is made. He has stressed on documents Ex C-1 to 13.
8 On the contrary, there is nothing on record on behalf of OPs as they are exparte and did not bother to appear in this Commission though having sufficient knowledge through notices and publication about present complaint against them.
9 Complainant has stressed on document Ex C-1 that is copy of Proposal Letter given by OPs to complainant wherein they have assured of timely delivery of all articles required for the system , regarding installation and for exception customer services. Tax envoice Ex C-3 also approves the pleadings of complaiannt. Ex C-5 copy of bank account Record Slip clearly proves the fact that amount of Rs.3 lacs has been duly paid by complainant to OPs through cheques dated 03.07.2019 and 27.07.2019. Legal notices placed on record also speak of grievance of the complainant and through his affidavit Ex C-1, he has reiterated his pleadings and made prayer for redressal of his grievance.
10 We have keenly considered the contentions in the light of evidence on record. Complainant has produced sufficient and cogent evidence to prove the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OPs.
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
Had OPs provided effective and efficient services by installing the said solar system upto the satisfaction of complainant, or had they taken cognizance of complaint at the first instance when complainant made requests to them, there would have no complaint at all. Act of OPs in not completing the installation work as agreed by them, amounts to deficiency in service.
11 From the above discussion, it is made out that OPs failed to render effective and efficient services to complainant as they did not keep their word and they did not install the solar system at his hospital. Therefore, under compelling circumstances, complainant had to get the same installed from some outside person by making payment of installation charges at higher rates, thus, he was not only burdened with additional financial cost but suffered mental harassment too. Complainant has succeeded in proving his case qua deficiency in service on the part of OPs, who failed to adhere to their own contractual liabilities and hence, complaint in hand is hereby allowed with direction to Opposite parties to pay Rs.20,000/-to complainant for harassment, mental agony and financial loss suffered by him on account of deficient services rendered by the OPs. OPs are further burdened with Rs.5,000/-as litigation expenses incurred by complainant. No order in regards to the consequential loss has been made for want of cogent evidence in this regard. Compliance of this order be made within one month of the receipt of the copy of the order. Copy of
‘cc. no.- 21 of 2021’
the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Commission:
Dated: 25.04.2023
Member Member President
(Vishav Kantt Garg) (Param Pal Kaur) (Priti Malhotra)
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.