DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No: CC/100/2023
Date of Institution: 17.08.2023
Date of Decision: 12.11.2024
Raghvir Chand son of Sh. Paras Ram resident of Tapa, District Barnala KARTA Tinku Poultry Farm, Alike Road, Tapa.
…Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Shiva Solar Power Projects, c/o Shiva Poultry Equipments, BKO Road, Pharwahi, District Barnala through Partner/Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Kavish.
2. M/s Ornate Solar A-87, Pocket D, Okhla Phase-2, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110020.
…Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Present: Sh. Rajesh Mittal Adv counsel for complainant.
Sh. Inder Paul Garg Adv counsel for opposite party No. 1.
Opposite party No. 2 exparte.
Quorum.-
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover: President
2. Smt. Urmila Kumari: Member
3. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg: Member
(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against M/s Shiva Solar Power Projects, c/o Shiva Poultry Equipments, BKO Road, Pharwahi, District Barnala through Partner/Proprietor/Authorized Signatory Mr. Kavish & others (in short the opposite parties).
2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant is running a poultry farm in the name and style of M/s Tinku Poultry Farm, HUF, Alike Road, Tapa District Barnala and is selling poultry products thereof and is the KARTA of said HUF firm and is thereby earning his livelihood. It is further alleged that opposite party No. 1 engaged in the business of solar power projects in the name of Shiv Solar Power Projects, BKO Road, Pharwahi, District Barnala and opposite party No. 1 is the authorized dealer of opposite party No. 2 is selling solar power project products throughout India through dealers duly appointed by opposite party No. 2. It is further alleged that the complainant was intended to install a solar power project to save the electricity bill and thereby approached the OP No.1 but the OP No. 1 not satisfy the complainant for the specifications, working, quality etc., and upon the request made by OP No.1 to OP No.2, the OP No.2 sent his representative to supply the information regarding specifications, working and quality, warranty, guarantee etc. of solar system to the complainant. It is alleged that the representative of OP No.2 narrated all the specifications, working and quality, warranty, guarantee etc. of solar power project to the complainant and thereby allured the complainant and offered a warranty of 5 years on the product including all the parts to be used in the installation of solar power project and assured the complainant that the product sold by OPs are of very high quality and further assured the complainant for their best services. It is further alleged that upon the assurance given by the OP No.2 the complainant consented to purchase the solar power project for an amount of Rs.7,35,000/- and the same was delivered and installed by OP No.1 and 2 vide invoice No.SSPP-3.19.20 dated 9.04.2019 and the complainant made the payment of Rs.7,35,000/- to OP No.1 against the said invoice and 5 year warranty is mentioned on the invoice. It is further alleged that in the month of May, 2023 one part of said solar power project i.e. the inverter stopped working due to some defect in it and the total system of solar power project became inactive, upon which the complainant contacted the opposite parties with regard to the defect in the inverter and the OP No.1 narrated the complainant that the complaint of the complainant has been forwarded to OP No.2 for rectification and OP No. 2 will soon approach the complainant for the removal of defects and for its ratification but the grievance of the complainant has not been resolved, rather, the matter has been lingered on by the opposite parties on one pretext or to the other. It is further alleged that being aggrieved the representative of the complainant also visited the OP No.2 on 19.06.2023 with regard to the replacement of above said inverter but with no results. The complainant also served a legal notice dated 24.07.2023 to the opposite parties to resolve the defect, but of no use. As such, the aforesaid act of the opposite parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.-
- The opposite parties may be directed to resolve the defect in the inverter either by replacing the said inverter with a new one or replacing the parts in the inverter and further make a payment of Rs.1 lac on account of the mental agony, harassment, financial loss caused to the complainant due to the above said act of the opposite parties and electricity bills duly paid by the complainant to the electricity department due to non-working of solar power project.
- Further, to pay Rs. 15,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 1 appeared and filed written version. It is alleged in the written version that on receipt of the complaint from the complainant, the complaint of the complainant was forwarded to the opposite party No. 2 by opposite party No. 1 for the rectification of the complaint of complainant, as a warranty of 5 years was provided by opposite party No. 2 being the manufacturer/supplier of the solar system. It is further alleged that the defect in the inverter of the solar system is to be rectified/resolved by opposite party No. 2 or be replaced with new one by opposite party No. 2. All other allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint against opposite party No. 1.
4. The opposite party No. 2 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 9.10.2023 due to non appearance.
5. Ld. Counsel for complainant on 13.2.2024 has suffered the statement that I do not want to file any rejoinder.
6. To prove the case the complainant tendered into evidence copy of bill Ex.C-1, copy of photograph Ex.C-2, copy of visitor book Ex.C-3, copy of legal notice Ex.C-4, copies of postal receipts Ex.C-5 & Ex.C-6 and affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-7 and closed the evidence.
7. The opposite party No. 1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Kavish Ex.O.P1/1, copy of bill dated 8.3.2019 Ex.O.P1/2 and closed the evidence.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
9. Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant is running a poultry farm in the name and style of M/s Tinku Poultry Farm, HUF, Alike Road, Tapa District Barnala and is selling poultry products thereof and is the KARTA of said HUF firm and is thereby earning his livelihood. It is further argued that opposite party No. 1 engaged in the business of solar power projects in the name of Shiv Solar Power Projects, BKO Road, Pharwahi, District Barnala and opposite party No. 1 is the authorized dealer of opposite party No. 2 is selling solar power project products throughout India through dealers duly appointed by opposite party No. 2. It is further argued that upon the assurance given by the opposite parties the complainant consented to purchase the solar power project for an amount of Rs. 7,35,000/- and the same was delivered and installed by opposite party No.1 and 2 vide invoice No. SSPP-3.19.20 dated 9.04.2019 and the complainant made the payment of Rs. 7,35,000/- to opposite party No.1 against the said invoice and 5 year warranty is mentioned on the invoice (Ex.C-1). It is further argued that in the month of May, 2023 one part of said solar power project i.e. the inverter stopped working due to some defect in it and the total system of solar power project became inactive upon which the complainant contacted the opposite party No.1 and the opposite party No. 1 forwarded the complaint of the complainant to opposite party No. 2 for rectification. It is further argued that the grievance of the complainant has not been resolved, rather, the matter has been lingered on by the opposite parties on one pretext or to the other. It is further argued that being aggrieved the representative of the complainant also visited the opposite party No.2 on 19.06.2023 with regard to the replacement of above said inverter but with no results and the complainant also served a legal notice dated 24.07.2023 (Ex.C-4) to the opposite parties to resolve the defect, but of no use.
10. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 1 argued that on receipt of the complaint from the complainant, the complaint of the complainant was forwarded to the opposite party No. 2 by opposite party No. 1 for the rectification of the complaint of complainant, as a warranty of 5 years was provided by opposite party No. 2 being the manufacturer/supplier of the solar system. It is further argued that the defect in the inverter of the solar system is to be rectified/resolved by opposite party No. 2 or be replaced with new one by opposite party No. 2.
11. The complainant has produced the invoice/bill of above said solar system Ex.C-1 to prove that the alleged system covered under warranty of 5 years. The opposite party No. 1 has also admitted this fact that solar system in question was under warranty and the opposite party No. 1 further admitted that the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 for the defect in the above said solar system and the opposite party No. 1 forwarded the complaint of the complainant to the opposite party No. 2. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 1 further argued that if there is any defect in the above said solar system then the opposite party No. 2 is liable for the same as the opposite party No. 1 acted as an agent of opposite party No. 2. The opposite party No. 1 has performed his all duties and obligations by forwarding the complaint of the complainant to the opposite party No. 2. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that the opposite parties may be directed to pay the electricity bills duly paid by the complainant to the electricity department due to non-working of solar power project.
12. On the perusal of facts and evidence produced by the complainant it revealed that the complainant has not produced any electricity bills which was paid by him due to non-working of solar power project to the electricity department. On the other hand, the opposite party No. 2 has preferred to remain exparte. The complainant also produced the photograph Ex.C-2 and the visitor book Ex.C-3 to prove that the complainant has approached the opposite parties. The complainant has produced legal notice dated 24.7.2023 Ex.C-4 and postal receipts Ex.C-5 & Ex.C-6 despite that opposite parties did not bother to rectify the defect in the above said solar system or to replace the same with new one.
13. In view of the above said circumstances and evidence produced by the parties, it established that the solar system is defective and by not repairing or replacing the defective solar system within period of warranty is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No. 2. Therefore, the present complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party No. 2 is directed to repair the solar system in question by replacing the faulty parts of the same without any costs under warranty within 45 days from the receipt of the copy of the order, failing which the opposite party No. 2 is directed to refund the purchase amount of solar system in question i.e. Rs. 7,35,000/- to the complainant. The opposite party No. 2 is further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- on account of compensation for causing mental torture, agony and harassment suffered by the complainant and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
12th Day of November, 2024
(Ashish Kumar Grover)
President
(Urmila Kumari)
Member
(Navdeep Kumar Garg)
Member
