PBEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.
Dated this the 29th day of March 2012
Filed on : 24/01/2012
Present :
Shri. A Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member. Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member
C.C. No. 50/2012
Between
P.K. Achuthan, : Complainant
Pariyarath (Kocheril) House, (By Adv. Philip T Varghese,
P.O. Kanjiramattom-682 315. T.D. Road, Ernakulam,
Kochin-11)
And
1. M/s. Team Solar Renewable : Opposite parties
Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd., (Absent)
Door No. 43/657, Chittoor road,
Kochi-682 018. rep. by its
Managing Director.
2. Mr. Raveesh Babu, Manager Sales,
Team Solar Renewable Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd.,
Door No. 43/657, Chittoor road,
Kochi-682 018.
3. Mr. Biju Nair, Executive, Team Solar
Renewable Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd.,
Door No. 43/657, Chittoor road,
Kochi-682 018.
O R D E R
A Rajesh, President.
The undisputed facts of the complainant’s case are as follows:
Attracted by an advertisement put out by the first opposite party promising sales and service of high quality solar water heaters the complainant contracted the opposite parties. The 2nd opposite party after his visit to the complainant’s premises told the complainant that the solar water heater could be installed at a cost of Rs. 25,500/- and that the complainant would get a refund of an amount of Rs. 6,600/- as Central government subsidy. The opposite parties made the complainant sign a purchase order form and collected a sum of Rs. 13,000/- on 30-06-2011. The complainant was told that the solar water heater would be delivered and installed on 02-07-2011. The following day the 2nd opposite party inspected the complainant’s house again and told the complainant that the solar water heater had to be erected facing southward direction and that complainant had to construct a separate elevated civil structure for accommodating the same. As the opposite parties had already collected a sum of Rs. 13,000/- from the complainant he had no other option but to adhere to the demands made by the opposite parties. The complainant had the necessary structure put up in conformity with the directions of the opposite parties by incurring an expense of Rs. 12,000/-. The opposite parties commenced installation work only after many persuasive calls made by the complainant. An additional amount of Rs. 2,500/- had to be spent by the complainant towards plumbing works. The opposite parties collected the balance payment of Rs. 12,500/- from the complainant on 22-07-2011. The opposite parties made the complainant sign on various printed forms and promised to arrange for the government subsidiary within a period of 90 days. To the dismay of the complainant it was found that the solar water heater is not functioning properly from the very inception. Hot water would be available only on exceptionally hot sunny days as against the promises made by the opposite parties that normal weather was sufficient for the system to operate efficiently. Complainant contacted the opposite parties several times and requested them to cure the defect in the system. However, the opposite parties did not care to inspect the system or attempt rectification of the defects at any time. The instruction manual of the solar water heater system was not supplied to the complainant and the complainant was put to great difficulty and hardship as he could not understand the operating procedures of the system. Complainant was thereafter supplied with the owners’ manual in December 2011 only after he insisted that the same should be supplied to him. The promised government subsidy has not been received by the complainant till date and he is not aware whether the opposite parties have submitted necessary forms for getting the same. On 16-12-2011 complainant sent a registered letter with acknowledgment due stating the entire facts for knowing the after sales services, maintenance of the Unit and for the payment of the subsidy to the opposite parties. But there was no response to the same though the same was received. Thus the complainant is before us seeking the following reliefs against the opposite parties.
i. to direct the opposite parties to refund the sum of Rs. 25,500/- collected from the complainant.
ii. To direct the opposite parties to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant for the loss suffered by him on account of deficiency in service rendered by opposite parties:
iii. To direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses.
2. Despite service of notice from this Forum the opposite parties opted not to contest the matter for their own reasons. Proof affidavit has been filed by the complainant, Exts. A1 to A9 were marked on his side. Heard the learned counsel for the complainant.
3. The points that arose for consideration are
i. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price
of the solar system from the opposite parties?
ii. Whether the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation
and costs of the proceedings to the complainant.
4. Point No. i. It is not in dispute that the complainant purchased a solar heater from the opposite parties at a total cost of Rs. 25,500/- evident from Ext. A1 invoice dated 30-06-2011. It is also not in dispute that the complainant has paid the amount to the opposite parties evident by Ext. A2 purchase order form dated 30-06-2011 and Ext. A3 receipt dated 22-07-2011. Ext. A4 warranty card issued by the opposite parties goes to show that 7years warranty has been provided by the opposite parties. According to the complainant he was not satisfied with the performance of the system and accordingly he caused Ext. A5 letter to the opposite parties. Even though the opposite parties acknowledged the letter they failed to respond. The non response on the part of the opposite parties in spite of Ext. A4 warranty for 7 years and on receipt of Ext. A5 letter amounts not only to deficiency in service but also unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. The contentions and evidence of the complainant remains unchallenged and nothing is on record to disbelieve the same. So the complainant is entitled to get refund of the price of the system with interest.
5. Point No. ii &iii. The averments of additional expenses and such having not been substantiated by the complainant before this Forum by any exhibit or evidence leaves this Forum only with a decision not to allow compensation. However apparently substantially averments being uncontroverted the complainant has been put to pecuniary loss in litigation. We award costs of Rs. 5,000/-
6. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct as follows:
i. The opposite parties shall jointly and severally refund Rs.
25,000/- being the price of the Solar Water heater to the
complainant with 12% interest p.a. from the date of receipt
till payment. The opposite parties shall take back the
system on their own cost
ii. The opposite parties shall jointly and severally pay Rs.
5,000/- to the complainant towards costs of the
proceedings for the reasons stated above.
The above said order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th day of March 2012.
Sd/- A Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
Appendix
Complainant’s exhibits :
Ext. A1 : Copy of invoice dt. 20-07-2011
A2 : Copy of purchase order form
A3 : Copy of receipt dt. 22-07-2011
A4 : Warranty card
A5 : Copy of letter dt. 14/12/2011
A6 : 2 A.D. cards
A7 : Postal receipts
A8 : Copy of cheques
A9 : Copy of reasons for
returned cheques
Opposite party’s Exhibits : : Nil
Copy of order despatched on :
By Post : By Hand:
