BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.471 of 2020

      Date of Instt. 28.12.2020

      Date of Decision: 30.06.2023

Deepak Jethi aged about 51 years son of Sh. Prem Chand Jethi resident of H. No.353, Lajpat Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

M/s Empire Office Systems (also known as Empire Office Systems), through its owner/proprietor Vishal Kohli, Shop No.11, Isherpuri Market (Near Dulhan Palace), Urban Estate Phase-III, Jalandhar, through its prop./owner Mr. Vishal Kohli

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)                                

Present:       Sh. Neeraj Kaushik, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Sh. Rajeev Garg, Adv. Counsel for the OP.

Order

Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that Vishal Kohli, owner/prop. of OP had approached the complainant for installation of a solar system as he claimed himself to be the owner/prop. of Empire Office Systems and claim to be the agent of Havells Solar System and accordingly, the complainant had opted for Havells Solar system Implantation at his premises. The vendor for implantation i.e. Vishal Kohli (owner/prop. of OP), owner of Empire Office Systems (also claims to be Emipre Solar System as per the bills), provided the quotation for a total cost of the system as Rs.6.15 Lacs with 5% GST. This project started in the month of April 2019 from which following transaction entries were made to Empire Office System from SBI, Main Branch, A/c No.65118650953. A total sum of Rs.6,50,000/- was paid to Mr. Vishal Kohli, prop./owner of OP. In spite of assuring best of services, owner/prop. Mr. Vishal Kohli was negligent and deficient in his services. Not only did he not give proper accounting bills, corresponding to the transaction entries made to his account but it seems that he has deliberately acted negligently in not providing proper services. When the customer care of Havells was contacted, they claim that they did not recognize the bills provided by Vishal Kohli and gave excuses about generating bills only by computerized means. The OP is guilty of the following negligence and deficiency services:-

a) That in spite of getting the payment, proper services were not provided to the complainant nor proper bills were issued. In fact, only part bills were issued by OP dated 10.07.2019, 17.07.2019, 22.07.2019 and 28.07.2019 and even these were also issued in favour of the complainant with bills having the printed/misprinted names of opposite party's firm Emipre Office System. The opposite party when was approached about this, he merely stated that this is just typographical matter and he is using both the names Empire as well as Emipre. Clearly the bills assured supply installation of solar panels of Havells with the model description. In fact, not only partial bills have been issued but no explanation has been given for not issuing the proper bills till date in spite having received the entire amount of Rs.6.50 Lacs vide cheque numbers detailed above.

b) That as per the commitment made by Mr. Vishal Kohli, owner/prop. of opposite party, the complainant was entitled to get the subsidy of Rs.1.75 Lacs with respect to Govt. Policy of opting solar implantation and till date, the same has not been got released by him in favour of the complainant.

c) That Mr. Vishal Kohli, owner/prop. of OP does not seem to have applied for Govt. Member approved solar meter and advised the complainant to start the system without PSPCL solar system at the time of installation/implantation of solar system. However, this error on his part resulted in tremendous loss to the complainant, because of which even the power consumed through solar system got computed through the regular PSPCL connection and complainant had to incur an extra cost due to overbilling resulted in the How 2 reflection of power usage in PSPCL bills, whereas the said power was actually consumed through solar system. The application for solar system was made in April 2019, the same was installed in June 2019 and opposite party asked Complainant to start operating the solar system but he did not apply the separate PSPCL solar meter which was his prime duty and he delayed the matter so much that the solar meter was got applied for and installed in June 2020. Due to the negligence and deficiency in the services on the part of OP, the complainant had suffered the financial loss of overbilling in electricity bills. All the requests to OP with regard to the electricity bills getting exalted due to his negligence fell on deaf ears and he simply stated that he shall compensate with regard to the same also.

d) That when the officials of Havells Solar System were contacted, they also claimed that a huge error has been committed by opposite party because the company advices and approves the starting of solar system only with solar meter and in case consumer has a delay in meter installation due to any circumstance, company provides a device that does not allow extra unit made by solar system to get added into the PSPCL meter. This again shows that opposite party committed grave negligence and deficiency in services.

e) That it was the duty of OP to apply for and get Solar Edge Inverter (25 years warranty) at the time of purchase. Till date, no such warranty has been handed over to the complainant in spite of this being his solemn duty, the complainant has not even been confirmed by OPP if he has applied for the same till date or not. His response has been that he has provided the warranty as written in the quotation. Again this is a matter of arrangement between OPs and proper service with respect to this is also liable to be provided to the complainant. Not only the opposite party was supposed to provide warranty regarding Solar Edge Inverter but also was supposed to provide warranty from Havells with regard to their solar panels which have their own unique serial numbers regarding which the warranty is to be issued by the OPs. Till date, no such warranty has been received by the complainant with regard to even solar panels.

f) That the installation of solar system required complete installation in implantation but till date, some components are still lying unconnected to the main system and after repeated requests to the opposite party, no effort has been made by OP to install and connect those. Clearly, non-joining/proper installation of said components would result in improper usage of solar system and may reduce its life even going by common sense. However, when these components are part of solar system, these just cannot be allowed to go waste like this. Negligence and deficiency in improper installation is also another liability of OP regarding which he is required to compensate the complainant.

g) That as per the standard procedure of installation, the connecting wires of the entire solar system cannot be left unattended without proper covering and properly imbedded in the insulated coverings/pipes but OP has not even taken care with regard to this and has put in danger the life of complainant, his family and relatives due to this and has made the system hazardous for their lives and property, for which reason also he is liable to compensate due to such negligence and deficiency.

h) That the manner of installation of the solar panel system was also not proper because of which reason, the building developed cracks and the pillars have can result in further deterioration and dilapidation of the structure of the building.

                   That clearly as per the above mentioned deficiency and negligence in the services given by OP, the complainant filed the present complaint with the prayer that an amount of Rs.6,50,000/- on account of amount paid for installation of solar system paid vide cheque. Further, An amount of Rs.1,75,000/- as Governmental subsidy, which the opposite party was duty bound to get it released. Further, an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of damage caused to the building and its structure as is clear from the photographs as it entails renovation and repair. Further, an amount of Rs.1,94,103/- on account of over charge of electricity bills which has been an actual computed damage/loss to the complainant due to negligence of OP and an amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for delay in issuance of proper bills alongwith a direction to be issued to OP to issue proper bills for the entire amount received and an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on account of damages or harassment or mental agony and fear of loss to life and property and Rs.30,000/- on account of various misc. and legal expenses being incurred by the complainant due to the negligence and deficiency in services regarding which the present complaint is 2021 being filed, alongwith interest @ 18 p.a. from the date of accrual till final realization and an amount of Rs.30,000/- as cost of misc. and legal expenses etc.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable. The contract between the parties as regarding commercial proposal, as such, the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the present complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties, as such, liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that no cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the present complaint against the OP, as such, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands and has suppresses true and material facts from this Commission, as such, the present complaint against the OP is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that there is not unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, as such, the present complaint against the OP is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant is stopped from filing the present complaint against the OPs, by his own act and conduct, as such, the same is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that in the contract proposal that net- metering and approval of DISCOM, if applicable, is not part of this proposal and it was also stipulated that Warranty as per terms and conditions mentioned herein. The subsidy matter was not the part of contract between the parties. It was the matter between the complainant and the government. The OP was nothing to do with the same. On merits, the factum with regard to calling quotations for the solar system for various companies by the complainant as well as submitting its quotation by the OP is admitted and the facts regarding installation of the solar system by the OP and paying the payment of the said system by the complainant is also admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement. 

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by counsel for both the parties very minutely.

6.                As complainant stated that proper bills of Rs.6,50,000/- were not issued and some were misprinted as on some bills were empire and some were printed as Emipre, but the OP replied that it is typographical mistake. In the inquiry conducted by Excise and Taxation Department, it was also held that the spelling mistake in the bills does not make any difference because GSTIN is paid as per rules. As stated by the complainant date on bills is different from the date of payment by the complainant, but total money is paid by the complainant i.e. Rs.6,50,000/- and same is admitted by the OP also. As stated by the complainant that it seems Empire has not applied a govt. approved solar system and also not applied solar meter. The complainant stated that without the solar meter, it resulted into loss to the complainant. Application for solar as stated by the complainant was applied in April, 2019 and solar was installed in June, 2019, but solar meter was applied late by OP and got installed in June, 2020. So, electricity bill from July, 2019 to July, 2020 are overcharged due to negligence of OP by late applying solar meter. That amount has been referred in bills from Ex.C7 to Ex.C13 as relied upon by the complaint. As stated by the complainant that he contacted Havells Solar System officials and they stated that company advices and approved the installing of solar system only with solar meter and in case, the solar meter installation is late, then company provides a device that does not allow extra unit made by solar system to get added into PSPCL meters. So, the OP has to apply and get the solar system as Edge Inverter. As stated by the complainant, warranty is also not provided by the OP regarding items, panels etc. which is the duty of the OP, but they are not provided any warranty of any component and they also stated some components which were not connected as photographs Ex.C-21 and Ex.C-22. So, it is the negligence of OP. Complainant stated that wires are not connected with insulation or pipes and it is a danger to complainant’s family as shown in Ex.C-23. He also stated that building and the pillars are getting cracks as system was not proper and it is normal procedure while installation, OP has to submit the report to PSPCL, who after verifying bill issued the subsidy. So, due to OP’s negligence complainant could not get subsidy.

7.                The OPs replied that in the contract proposal the net metering and approval of DISCOM, if applicable, is not part of the proposal. OPs stated that subsidy matter was not the part of contract between the parties. It is between the complainant and the government and OPs does not have any role for subsidy. The OPs states that contract was to provide 100% payment in advance, but complainant had not provided full payment in advance as he has given some payment after seven months from the purchase of order and by four months late from installing of the solar system. The complainant made complaint to Excise and Taxation Department, who also, after hearing both parties gave decision that subsidy is   to be applied by customer because OTP                                          will come on the registered number of consumer and as stated by OP, the complainant himself had applied the subsidy in December, 2019 and he also admitted in Excise and Taxation Department enquiry that he applied for the subsidy. OPs have stated that it is the duty of the customer to apply for solar meter as written in contract and not of the OPs. OPs stated that all warranty cards of material are handed over to the family member of the consumer while delivering the materials and warranty can be checked online by putting serial numbers. The OPs stated that wires connection, which are open, are of old wires of the generator etc. and cracks in the building are also prior one.

8.                After going through the statements and arguments of both the parties, it is observed that applying subsidy is not a duty of the OP and wires which are not insolated are old one of generator etc. and cracks in the building are also old one as building is very old, moreover, installation is done on the roof not on the walls or pillars, but applying of solar meter to PSPCL is the duty of the OP as the OP has failed to prove any letter or contract, wherein it is written that applying of solar meter is duty of the consumer as alleged. OP got solar meter installed even after about one year and OP also advised the complainant to start the system without PSPCL solar meter at the time of installation of the solar system. This is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.

9.                In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP is directed to pay the overcharging bills of Rs.1,94,000/- from July 2019 to July, 2020 incurred by the complainant due to one year late installation of solar meter with 6% interest. Further, OP is directed to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.8000/- as litigation expenses and further OP is directed to complete the project to the satisfaction of the complainant and give written warranty of the solar system to the complainant. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

10.               Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

30.06.2023           Member                        Member              President