Dr. Nitin Agarwal S/o Shanti Swaroop Agarwal R/o Vidha Nagar  Colony, Ramghat Road, Aligarh.

Complainant

V/s

1. Proprietor M/s  Arise Enterprises Ramghat Road, Aligarh near HDFC Bank, Niranjan puri Aligarh.
2. Luminous Power Technology Pvt. Ltd. C-56, Mayapuri Industrial Area, Phase –II Mayapuri Delhi-110064
3. Manager Adani Solar India  2^nd Floor South Wing, Shantipuram, 59 Highway, Ahmadabad , Gujarat  382421 Gujarat.  

                                                                      Opposite Parties

CorAm

Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhyay, Member

PRONOUNCED BY SHRI HASNAIN QURESHI, PRESIDENT

Judgment

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for the following reliefs:-

1. The Ops be directed to get their defective solar panel system returned and to repay the amount Rs. 1334193.74/-
2. The Ops be directed to pay the amount Rs. 35,000/-  the cost of the damaged EPABX Machine, Rs. 1,20,000/- the cost of damaged CCTV MVR Machine and Rs. 6000/- the cost of damaged smart light.
3. The Ops be directed to pay the amount at the rate of Rs. 6000/- per day from 23.07.2020 for the loss of the hospital.
4. Ops be directed to pay Rs.1 lac. compensation for mental agony. 
5. Any other relief suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case be granted in favour of complainant.

2. The complainant has stated he is the Doctor and runs hospital in the name and style of Doctor Nitin Agarwal ENT Care Centre. He had purchased the luminous battery manufactured by Op no. 2 and solar panel manufactured by the Op no. 3 from the establishment of Op no. 1 on 22.07.2020. When the complainant installed the solar panel at its establishment, the solar panel did not work and thereby the EPABX Machine, CCTV NVR Machine and Smart Light were damaged due to internal defect in installation of the solar panel. Complainant told the Ops about the damages but the problem could not be solved.  
3. There is no W.S. of the Op no.1 and the Op no. 2 and 3 have filed W.S. Op no. 2 has stated that on receiving mail on 21.10.2020 in respect of Solar PCU alleging of not working. Op approached the complainant but the complainant denied for any repair and demanded complete refund. Accordingly Op followed up since 21.10.2020 till 07.11.2020 on call and mail but the complainant did not give a single reply. Complainant was approached for collecting cancelled cheque for refund the amount but the complainant denied and thereby Op was unable to refund the amount. Op no. 3 stated in W.S that the answering Op is the manufacturer of the solar panel and provides warranty on the solar panel. The answering Op received no compliant of the alleged defect of the solar panel from the complainant. Apart from solar panels Battery, inverter and proper connectivity with the grid is required to generate the electricity. Further sunlight is also required to generate electricity from solar plant. If the solar plant is under shadow of any object like trees or buildings the plant cannot generate power effectively admittedly solar plant was installed by Op no1 and its one of the components solar panel was manufactured by the answering Op but the  complainant failed to show any document for warranty/guarantee provided by the Op and did not claim/inform the Op. Complainant replied the statement made in W.S by the Ops and it was stated that several complaints were made and the representative of Op no. 3 told that there was defect in plant which would be cured but it was not cured and the machines installed at the Hospital were damaged by the acts of the Op no. 2.
4. The complainant has filed affidavit and papers in support of their case and Op has also filed affidavit and papers.
5. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
6. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
7. It is evident that the solar panel manufactured by the Op no. 3 and battery were purchased by the complainant from Op no. 1 and the solar plant did not work. Complainant complained to Op no. 2 and the representative visited the hospital and they discussed about the problem but no fruitful result could be achieved. Complainant has deposed about the damages caused by non-functioning of the solar plant. Op no. 1 is the representative of the Op no. 3 who sells the solar panel manufactured by Op no. 3 and therefore, Op no. 3 is liable for the acts and negligence of the Op no. 1. Thus, the complainant is entitled for refund of the cost of the solar panel and for reimbursement of the damages.
8. The question formulated above is decided in favour of the complainants as discussed above.

1.    We hereby direct the Ops to repay jointly and severally the amount Rs. 334193.74/- to the complainant, the cost of defective solar panel system with the liberty to the Ops to take  solar panel system. Ops are also directed to pay the amount Rs. 35,000/-  the cost of the damaged EPABX Machine, Rs. 1,20,000/- the cost of damaged CCTV and MVR Machine and Rs. 6000/- the cost of damaged smart light. Ops are further directed to pay compensation Rs. 1 lac. for harassment.

9. Op shall comply with the directions within 30 days failing which op shall be prosecuted for non compliance in accordance with section-72 of the Act for awarding punishment against it.
10. A copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties as per rules as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act-2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for perusal of the parties.
11. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of Judgment.