DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF AUGUST, 2024.
PRESENT : SRI. VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT.
: SMT. VIDYA .A, MEMBER.
: SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
Date of filing: 20.07.2023.
CC/182/2023
Abdul Basheer, S/o.Moideen kutty, - Complainant
Peepond house, Pazhaya lakkidi,
Akalur Post, Palakkad-679 302.
Represented by PA holder,
Shanoob, S/o. Alassankode,
Eachayil House, Ambalappara.
(By Adv.K.Sivaprasad)
VS
1. The Managing Director, -Opposite Parties
Adhi Solar, 2-C/2, Kumaran Nagar,
Opp. VKR Kalyanamandapam, Vilankurich Road,
Vilakurichi PO, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu-641 035.
2. The Manager, Udaya Inverters,
Micro System, PO Kongad,
Palakkad District.
(Both OPs are ex-parte)
ORDER
BY SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
1. Pleadings of the complainant in brief
The complainant purchased a Grow Watt Solar ongrid inverter from the opposite parties on 27.11.2019, paying Rs.47,250/-. The product was having warranty of seven years. During July, 2022, the inverter ceased to function in toto. When informed, the opposite parties initially agreed to replace the system. But they failed to replace or repair the product in spite of repeated follow up made by the complainant. Hence, the complainant had to pay heavy electricity bill due to the non functioning of the solar invertors. The complainant sent legal notices to the opposite parties demanding refund of the cost (Rs.47,250/-), Rs.8,330/- being the electricity charges incurred and Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. The 1st opposite party did not receive the notice, and the second opposite party neither bothered to reply to the notice nor pay the amount demanded.
Aggrieved by the above act of the opposite parties, this complaint is filed seeking refund of Rs.47,250/- being the cost of the inverter, along with Rs.8,330/- being the additional electricity bill, and a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental agony and other inconvenience caused and cost.
2. The complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. They did not enter appearance or file version. Hence, they were set ex-parte.
3. As per the orders in IA.No.30/2024 filed by the complainant, an expert Commissioner was appointed and he submitted his report on 21.03.2024.
4. The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.A1 to A5 as evidence. Expert Commissioner’s report was marked as Ext.C1.
5. Ext.A1 is the invoice issued by the 1st opposite party for the solar inverter supplied to the complainant on 25.11.2019. Exts.A2, A3 and A4 are the copy of lawyer notice issued, postal receipt and postal acknowledgment signed by the 2nd opposite party respectively. Ext.A5 is the postal cover addressed to the 1st opposite party returned undelivered.
6. The Expert Commissioner’s report marked as Ext.C1, clearly spell out the observations as follows;
1. The commitment to the product by the owner during the warranty period is not honoured.
2. There is no signs of tampering or physical damage in the solar panel, the inverter or MCB.
3. Respondent 2 had turned off the MCBs connected to the PV inverter on his visit to the site.
He has also reported that the service for the malfunction was beyond the scope of respondent No.2.
7. From the above, it is clear that the malfunction of the system was due to the defect of the product supplied by the 1st opposite party who has to be held responsible for deficiency in service, which caused financial loss, mental agony and other inconvenience to the complainant.
8. Further, the opposite parties did not enter appearance and present their case before this Commission in spite of repeated opportunities given.
9. Hence, as a prima facie case is proved against the 1st opposite party, the following orders are passed.
1. The 1st opposite party is directed to refund Rs.47,250/- being the cost of the product along with interest @ 10% pa from 27.11.2019 till the date of actual payment.
2. The 1st opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- towards financial loss and mental agony.
3. The 1st opposite party is also liable to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
On payment of the above amounts, the complaint is to return the product to the 1st opposite party. The 2nd opposite party is exonerated of the liability as the deficiency is attributed to the 1st opposite party.
Pronounced in open court on this the 9th day of August, 2024.
Sd/-
VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT.
Sd/-
KRISHNANKUTTY N .K, MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the complainant:
Ext.A1: Original invoice No.325 issued by the opposite party No.1 to the complainant dated 25.11.2019.
Ext.A2: Copy of lawyer notice dated 15.02.2023.
Ext.A3: Original postal receipt dated 17.02.2023.
Ext.A4: Original acknowledgment card.
Ext.A5: Postal cover containing notice of the 1st opposite party returned undelivered
Document marked from the side of Opposite party: Nil
Document marked from the side of Court:
Ext.C1: Expert Commissioner’s report.
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Court witness: Nil
Cost : 10,000/-.
NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5)of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.
