Delhi

North East

CC/151/2017

Sh. Shashi Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Sai solar Consultants & Traders O Solar Energy System - Opp.Party(s)

18 Mar 2019

ORDER

 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

  1. Brief facts giving rise to the present complaint are that complainant had placed an order for three sets of solar panel of Shri Sai Solar and four sets of Midas Panel with OP and purchased the same on 24.06.2016 from OP vide invoice numbers 416 & 417 for sum of Rs. 70,600/- + Rs. 200/- towards conveyance on assurance of OP that the same shall be installed by OP at the premises of the complainant. However, the complainant was shocked when he received the repaired solar panels of Bharat Solar Company having manufacturing year of 2012. The complainant requested the OP time and again vide visits and phone calls to replace the said solar panel with the ones asked for / placed order for but the OP avoided the replacement on one pretext or the other. The complainant issued a legal notice to the OP dated 17.03.2017 asking OP to replace the solar panels alongwith compensation but the OP failed to do either. Therefore, the complainant was constrained to file the present complainant alleging deficiency of service against the OP since the said solar panels did not work and the complainant had to use electricity as mode of consumption due to low wattage given by the said panels. The complainant prayed for replacement of the said solar panels and compensations to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- for harassment, mental torture, pain and agony caused by OP.

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.

  1. Notice was issued to the OP on 18.05.2017 and was served on 08.06.2017 but none appeared and therefore OP was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 25.07.2017.
  2. Ex-parte evidence and written arguments were filed by the complainant on 10.11.2017 and 01.02.2018 respectively.
  3. On directions of this Forum to place on record the photographs of the solar panels and to prove that the said panel were purchased for the domestic purpose and were manufactured in 2012, the complainant placed on record the photographs of the solar panels bearing model no 12170, serial no 505, year of manufacturing 2012 alongwith installation at his residence terrace.
  4. We have heard the arguments forwarded the counsel for the complainant and perused the documentary evidence placed on record. In absence of rebuttal to the averment / allegations of complainant against OP, a case of selling commodity of an old manufacturing date is established and made out against OP as an act of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice for having sold 2012 manufactured solar panels in 2016.

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.

  1. In light of the settled proposition of law held by Hon’ble National Commission and Hon’ble Delhi SCDRC and applying the same to the present case in hand of OP having sold a 2012 manufactured solar panel to the complainant in 2016, we hold the OP guilty of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and direct the OP to refund the cost of the solar panels i.e. Rs. 70,600/- to the complainant.  We further direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation for mental harassment to the complainant. Let the order be complied by OP within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.  
  2.  Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
  3.   File be consigned to record room.
  4.   Announced on  18.03.2019

 

 

(N.K. Sharma)

     President

 

 

(Sonica Mehrotra)

 Member

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.