Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/49/2023

GURPRATAP SINGH SAHI - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S MAHIRA - Opp.Party(s)

INDERJIT KAUSHAL

16 Jan 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	49/2023
Date of Institution	:	24.01.2023
Date of Decision	:	16.01.2024

 

                     

            

 

Gurpartap Singh Sahi s/o late S.Ajit Singh, IAS (Retd.), Senior Citizen aged 82 years r/o H.No.700, Sector 11-B, Chandigarh.

                 ...  Complainant.

Versus

1.  M/s Mahira through its Owner/Authorized Signatory, Plot No.218, Industrial Area, Phase-9, Mohali-160062.

    2^nd Address:- Shop No.1 & 2, Singhpura, Zirakpur, Distt. SAS Nagar-140103.

2.  Sh.Arun Kumar Uppal, Owner of M/s Mahira, Shop No.1 & 2, Singhpura, Zirakpur, Distt. SAS Nagar-140103.

2^nd Address:-

Plot No.218, Industrial Area, Phase-9, Mohali-160062.

3.  Chandigarh Renewable Energy and Science and Technology Promotion Society (CREST), through its Executive Offiver, First Floor, Paryavaran Bhawan, Madhya Marg, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh -160019.

…. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:
	SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Present:-
	Sh.Inderjit Kaushal, Counsel for the complainant OPs No.1 & 2 exparte. Sh.Prince Goyal, Counsel for OP No.3

   

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1.     The complainant has filed the present complaint pleading therein that OP No.1 issued a purchase order (Annexure C-1) for supply and installation of 5KW Solar Power Plant on grid for Rs.3,05,000/- as full and final payment, which was credited/paid through cheque dated 08.08.2019 to OP No.1 (Annexure C-2). After receiving the full payment, OPs No.1 and 2 did not install the solar power plant at the premises of the complainant and left the work incomplete despite his repeated requests.  OP No.3 also pointed out deficiencies i.e. including non-installation of the inverter of 5 KW, array junction and inter-connection cables and parts and assessed the value of the left out equipment for installation at Rs.1.10 lakhs.  It has further been alleged due to non installation of the solar power plant, the complainant has  to suffer monetary loss by paying the electricity bills.  Besides this, OP No.3 also failed to check and access the performance of OPs No.1 and 2 for supplying sub-standard equipment and not completing the work despite receipt of full payment. The complainant also got served a legal notice dated 12.12.2022 (Annexure C-4) upon the OPs but the same has failed to yield any positive result. However, OP No.3 had uploaded the office order regarding blacklisting of OP No.1-Company. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint seeking directions to the OPs to refund Rs.3,05,000/- along with interest, compensation for mental agony and physical harassment as well as litigation expenses.
2.     Despite due service through proclamation, OPs No.1 and 2 failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 28.06.2023.
3.     After service of notice, OP No.3 appeared before this Commission and filed its written version stating that being a nodal agency for implementation of solar projects at Chandigarh, empanels various vendors from time to time through e-tendering subject to the terms and conditions stipulated by MNRE and DNIT.  It has further been stated that OP No.1-Company got empanelled on 18.09.2018. On receiving numerous complaints and inspecting various sites those were facilitated by OP No.1, they came to know that OP No.1 had been overcharging than the approved rates and delaying installation of SPV Power Plants at various premises in Chandigarh and, therefore, OP No.1 was issued notice bearing No. CREST/05/2019/218 dated 02.05.2019 (Annexure OP-3/5) and Show Cause Notice bearing No.CREST/02/2020/3990 dated 17.02.2020  (Annexure OP-3/6) and finally OP No.1 was blacklisted vide order CREST/01/2021/3016 dated 29.01.2021, for violating MNRE guidelines and terms and conditions of DNIT (Annexure  OP-3/7). It has further been stated that the complainant and OP No.3 does not have any privity of contract  and, therefore, the complaint qua it deserves to be dismissed.
4.     The contesting parties filed their respective affidavits and documents in support of their case.
5.     We have heard the Counsel for the contesting parties and have gone through the documents on record.
6.     From the documentary evidence placed on record especially from the purchase order (Annexure C-1), it is observed that the complainant had availed the services of OPs No.1 and 2 for supply and installation of 5KW Solar Power Plant on grid for Rs.3,05,000/- and the same were credited/paid by the complainant through cheque dated 08.08.2019 to OP No.1 as is clear from the bank passbook (Annexure C-2). However, the solar power plant has not been completely installed at the premises of the complainant by OPs No.1 and 2 despite his repeated requests and receipt of the full payment and they left out some works i.e. non-installation of the inverter of 5 KW, array junction, inter-connection cables and parts worth Rs.1,10,000/-. Besides this, OP No.1-Company has already been blacklisted by OP No.3 due to overcharging than the approved rates and delaying installation of SPV Power Plants at various premises in Chandigarh. The aforesaid acts of incomplete installation of the solar power plant at the premises on the complainant despite his repeated requests and receipt of the full payment certainly amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of OPs No.1 and 2. Thus, the complainant is entitled to Rs.1,10,000/- towards incomplete installation of the solar power plant instead of the entire amount.
7.              Pertinently, OPs No.1 and 2 did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of OPs No.1 and 2 draws an adverse inference against them. The non-appearance of OPs No.1 and 2 shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.   
8.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be partly allowed qua OPs No.1 and 2 and the same is accordingly allowed. OPs No.1 and 2 are directed to refund Rs.1,10,000/- to the complainant towards the left out works along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 08.08.2019 till the date of its actual payment.   
9.     This order be complied with by OPs No.1 and 2 within ninety days from the date of receipt of its certified copy.
10.     The complaint qua OP No.3 stands dismissed.
11.     The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
12.     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission 16.01.2024
	Sd/- (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/- (B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER