Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/177/2021

Prem Parkash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kajla Sollar - Opp.Party(s)

A.K Vashisth

04 Mar 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

 

                  Consumer Complaint No. : 177 of 2021

                  Date of Institution             : 10.09.2021

                                                           Date of Decision               : 04.03.2024

 

 

Prem Prakash son of Sh. Ram Kishan R/o Kirti Nagar, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.

 

          ……Complainant.

 

Versus

 

1. Fidus Energy Systems Gurugram, Khata No.338, Garoli Khurd, Sector 37B,Pataudi Road, Opposite Sector 37C, Main Road, T-Point, Gurugram-122001.

 

2. Kajla Solars, Near SBI, Siwani Road Tosham, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani, through its Proprietor Sandeep.

 

3. Anil Authorized Agent, Kajla Solars, Near SBI, Siwani Road, Toshan, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani.

 

….. Opposite Party.

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT, 2019.

 

 

BEFORE:     Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-      Sh. Mahender Singh, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Pawan Punia, Advocate for OP No.2.

Sh. Ram Mehta, Advocate for OP No.3.  

                    OP No.1 exparte.

 

ORDER

 

Saroj Bala  Bohra, Presiding Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant contacted OP No.2 for installation of 3 KW solar system at his residential house and it was agreed to install the same in sum of Rs.1,05,000/- including installation charges and meter security charges. In this regard, OP No.3 received a payment of Rs.50,000/- on 01.04.2021 and further Rs.50,000/- on 06.05.2021. Complainant has stated that he also issued a cheque in favour of Anil but same was not returned to complainant till date.  In the last week of May 2021, OPs No.2 & 3 installed the solar system. Complainant has submitted that he invested a sum of Rs.1,13,000/- on the said solar system but the original bill was not given by the OPs. It is alleged that after some days, complainant came to know that structure of solar panel is weak and substandard quality. So, complainant contacted OP No.1 through Whatsapp and told that the system installed is unsafe and hazardous. It is stated that two panel of the said solar system were flown away due to wind on 02.07.2021. OPs No.2 & 3 visited the spot and made it partially serviceable. Complainant has averred that in such a situation, complainant is staying under risk and constant danger as the system may fly off any time and may cause major injury.  Legal notice dated 03.08.2021 was also issued upon the OPs but of no avail.  Hence, the present complaint has been preferred alleging deficiency in service resulting into mental and physical harassment  besides monetary loss. In the end, prayer made for issuance of directions against the OPs to install high quality structure, to pay Rs.1.00 lac as compensation for harassment besides litigation expenses as Rs.22,000/-. Further to return cheque bearing No.000057 dated 25.03.2021. Any other relief, to which this Commission deems fit may also be awarded in favour of complainant.

2.                 Upon notice OPs No.2 & 3 appeared through counsel whereas OP No.1 did not appear despite notice and was proceeded against as exparte vide order dated 17.12.2021.

3.                 OP No.2 filed written statement raising preliminary objections qua cause of action, locus standi, maintainability and suppression of material facts. On merits, it is submitted that entire system including all instruments and parts were purchased by complainant himself from OP No.1.  The alleged amount of Rs.1,05,000/- was settled by complainant and payment thereof was directly made to the OP No.1. However, it is submitted that the answering OP only rendered the services for installation of solar system. Further, the services provided qua installation was absolutely perfect and there was no deficiency in service.  However, if any such deficiency occurred by the answering OP (though not admitted) even then it is ready to rectify the same.  In the end, prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4.                 OP No.3 filed its written statement raising preliminary objections qua locus standi, cause of action, maintainability and suppression of material facts by complainant. On merits, it is submitted that answering OP being employee of OP No.2, accompanied him to the site and took snaps of the spot but he has nothing to do with the settlement of the amount for installation of the solar system. It is stated that the answering OP received cheque No.57 dated 26.03.2021 and cheque No.58 dated 01.04.2021. Rs.47,000/- in cash was paid on 06.05.2021 and Rs.3000/- was paid on 23.05.2021 to the labourers for installation of the solar system at the spot.  Cheque No.57 was not the name of answering OP and the same sent to the OP No.1 and OP No.1 transferred the amount of the said cheque No.57 into the account of complainant. As such, this OP denied any deficiency in service on its part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

5.                 Learned counsel for complainant tendered affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-4 and Mark C-1 in evidence of complainant and closed the same.

6.                 On the other side, affidavit of Mr. Sandeep, Proprietor Ex. RW2/A on behalf of OP No.2  and affidavit of Mr. Anil Ex. RW3/A on behalf of OP No.3 were tendered and closed their evidences.

 7.                We have heard learned counsel for the contesting parties and perused the record minutely.

8.                 It is admitted case of the OPs No.2 & 3 that they installed the solar system in question at the premises of complainant. Perusal of documents annexed with Ex. C-4 reveal that whole the system sold to complainant shall have warrant and comprehensive maintenance contract for 5 years from the date of of commissioning of the project i.e. 05.05.2021. Ex. C-4 further shows that the solar system was sold by the OP No.1. From receipts Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-3 reveal that OP No.3 had taken certain amounts from complainant on behalf of OP No.2.

9.                 From the contents of complaint, e-mails dated 10.07.2021 and legal notice dated 03.08.2021, it is clear that the panel of the solar system were flown away on 02.07.2021. In this way, the solar system was within warranty period and thus complainant is entitled to get the two defective panel/plates replaced without any charges.  In view of the above, we are of considered that there was deficiency in service on the part of OPs No.1 & 2 either in supplying substandard quality panels to the complainant or there was any improper installation.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and the OPs No.1 & 2, jointly and severally, are directed to comply with the following directions within 30 days from the date of order:-

1. To replace the two defective solar panel/plates with new one of standard quality and to get them installed properly.
2. To pay Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) on account of harassment suffered by complainant at the hands of OPs.
3. To pay Rs.5500/- (Rs. Five thousand five thousand) as litigation expenses.
4. OP No.2 to return the alleged cheque  No.000057 dated 25.03.2021 to the complainant, if he has no concern with it. 

                    In case of default, the OP shall liable to pay simple interest @ 9% per annum on all the aforesaid awarded amounts from today till its actual realization. If this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both. Certified copies of the order be sent to parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.  

 

Announced.           

Dated: 04.03.2024