Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/189/2022

Jagdish - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sunfel Technologies - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jan 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI.

 

                                                              Complaint Case No. 189 of 2022

                                                         Date of Institution:   28.07.2022

                                                          Date of Decision:     23.01.2024

Jagdish S/o Sh. Surjan Singh, Village  Bhageshwri, Tehsil& District Charkhi Dadri, Haryana

                                                                ….Complainant.

Versus

1. Sunfel Technogies LLP 525, Phase II, Barhi Industrial Area, Sonepat, Haryana-131101.
2. Battery House Charkhi Dadri, Near Bus Stand, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil & District Charkhi Dadri.

                                                                                                                                                                ....OPs/Respondents. 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.

 

Before: -      Hon’ble Sh. Manjit Singh Naryal, President

                   Hon’ble Sh. Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member.

 

Present:        Complainant in person.

                   OP no.2 exparte vide order dt.24.02.2023.

                   OP no.1 exparte vide order dt. 07.07.2023

 

ORDER:-    

               

1.                 Jagdish (hereinafter referred to as “the complainant”) has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as “the OPs) with the averments that the complainant had asked the OP to get a domestic solar plate installed in his house and the OP told the complainant that he would get the domestic solar system installed on which subsidy for Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- would be given by the Government. OP collected Rs.22,000/- from the complainant. The complainant got the solar plate of Sunfel Technologies installed in the complainant’s House vide bill dated 07.03.2020. OP, Battery House owner fraudulently gave UPS on which there was no subsidy. Hence, the complainant gave the UPS back to the Battery House who did not pay any amount for the same. The subsidy was not given even after more than 2 years. OP Battery House owner had been giving us false assurance for subsidy but now he has clearly refused. Due to act and conduct of OP, he has suffered mental pain, agony and financial loss and there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.                 Upon notice, opposite party No.1&2 failed to appear and were proceeded against exparte

3.              Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex. CW-1/A, documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C3 and closed his evidence on dated 25.10.2023.

4.                     We have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for complainant. All the documents have been perused carefully and minutely.

 5.                  During the course of arguments, the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint filed by the complainant and has drawn the attention of this Commission towards the documents placed on record on his behalf.

6.                     The  complainant to prove his case has placed on record purchase bill of the Solar Power Generating System with SMU 500Watt and Erection, Installation & Commissioning  as Ex. C-1 whereby it is revealed that it was purchased for Rs.22,000/-.  The complainant further to strengthen his case has filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A which corroborates his version in the complaint.  The complainant has not placed on record any document regarding assurance of OP for subsidy whereas he has only filed his affidavit in this regard. The complainant has not filed any evidence for commitment for subsidy by the OP. It has been observed that the complainant was sanctioned subsidy by Additional Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani vide sanction no. NRE/BHW/2020/500 Watt/ Dated 28.02.2020 which was subject to certain compliances. Thereafter, the complainant had purchased Solar Power Generating System with SMU 500 Watt vide invoice no.2019-20/1703 dated 07.03.2020. Subsequently project completion report of Solar Inverter chargers was prepared (Ex.C2). The complainant was required to pursue for subsidy with the ADC, Bhiwani/Government which he has not done         

7. In view of aforesaid discussions, we find that the complainant has not been able to prove his case in regard to assurance/ commitment for subsidy by the OPs. In these circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant, is not maintainable against the OPs and the complainant is not entitled for getting any compensation and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly the complaint is dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to file its claim for subsidy with ADC, who had sanctioned subsidy as per their letter dt. 28.02.2020, if the complainant is otherwise eligible and the same is not time barred.  Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated 23.01.2024