Sh. Shashi Kumar filed a consumer case on 18 Mar 2019 against Shri Sai solar Consultants & Traders O Solar Energy System in the North East Consumer Court. The case no is CC/151/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 27 Mar 2019.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93
Complaint Case No. 151/17
In the matter of:
| Sh. Shashi Kumar S/o Late Sh. Anand Prakash R/o 1/3222, Ram Nagar Shahdara Delhi-110032 |
Complainant |
|
Versus
| |
| Shri Sai Solar Consultants & Traders of Solar Energy System Shop No. 771 Old Lajpat Rai Market Delhi-110006 |
Opposite Party |
| DATE OF INSTITUTION: JUDGMENT RESERVED ON: DATE OF DECISION : | 01.05.2017 18.03.2019 18.03.2019 |
N.K. Sharma, President
Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member
Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member
ORDER
Complainant has attached copy of invoice numbers 416 & 417 dated 24.06.2016 towards purchase of solar panels from OP and copy of legal notice to OP with postal receipt.
The Hon’ble National Commission in the judgment of Hind Motor (I) Ltd vs Lakhbir Singh passed in Revision Petition No. 2790 of 2008 and 4345 of 2008 decided on 02.12.2013 had dealt with a similar case of Hind Motors having sold a July 2005 manufactured vehicle to the complainant in January 2006 in which the complainant had alleged the manufacturing defects apart from having been sold an old vehicle. The District Forum had directed Tata Motors to deliver a new defect free car to the complainant alongwith interest and other damages and the appeal against this order before Hon’ble State Commission was dismissed on grounds that Tata Motors was not having fair dealing with its customers and taken contradictory and false pleas in their pleadings proving their malafide intention. Therefore Tata Motors have filed Revision Petition before Hon’ble National Commission. The Hon’ble National Commission while observing that as per averments made in the complaint, the manufacturing date of the vehicle was mentioned as July 2005 but was sold and delivered to the complainant in January 2006 meaning thereby that the old as well as used vehicle was sold and no specific denial of this averment of complainant came forth from the petitioner / OP, held that this act of petitioner / OP in selling the vehicle which was manufacture in year 2005, in the year 2006, without disclosing the date of manufacture to the complainant certainly amounts to unfair trade practice. Therefore the Hon’ble National Commission upheld the judgment of Hon’ble State Commission Punjab and dismissed the Revision Petitions.
The Hon’ble Delhi SCDRC in the judgment of Sanmati Motors (P) Ltd Vs Chandrasekhar 2006 (I) CLT 250 held that when an old vehicle was sold by representing it as a new vehicle there cannot be any worse kind of unfair trade practice then selling the old vehicle representing it as a new one.
(N.K. Sharma) President |
|
(Sonica Mehrotra) Member |
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.