Haryana

Panchkula

CC/474/2019

AJAY GUPTA. - Complainant(s)

Versus

ZUNROOF TECH PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

MS.NEELAM GUPTA

26 Feb 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	474of 2019
Date of Institution	:	26.08.2019
Date of Decision	:	26.02.2020

 

Ajay Gupta S/o Sh. Sumer Chand Gupta, R/o House No.1758, Sector-28, Panchkula.

                                                                                  ….Complainant

 

Versus

ZUNROOF Tech Pvt. Ltd., # 581, DLF Phase 5, Sector-43, Gurgaon, Haryana-122009, through its Managing Director.

 

 

….Opposite Party

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Before:                  Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr.SushmaGarg, Member.

 

For the Parties:      Ms.Neelam Gupta, Advocate, for the complainant.

                             OP already exparte Vide Order Dated 18.10.2019.

 

ORDER

(Per Dr.SushmaGarg, Member)

 

1.             The brief facts of the present complaint are thatthe complainant had approached the opposite party through their website on 28.03.2019 to purchase and get installed a 3KW Grid Solar Power Plant at his residence. Accordingly, the OPs contacted the complainant on 29.03.2019 and the complainant agreed to purchase the solar power plant from the OPs. The representative of the OP company Sh. LovitSawhney visited the Complainant on 31.03.2019 and inspected the site wherein structure, earthing cables and lightning arrestor were already fixed and quoted/finalized the price of complete 3KW Solar System for Rs.1,59,000/-. The deal was fixed with an understanding and assurance that if the complainant pays the token money today itself, the work on the project can be started in a day or two. The complainant accepted the proposal and paid Rs.5000/- as token money on the same day. The complainant after waiting for a week contacted the OP and asked for the progress made in his case so far. Ms. Purnima at the office of Op assured the complainant that she will confirm it from the layout designing team and revert back in the evening,but no response was received from the side of the Op. After that the complainant a day after tried to contact Mr. LovitSawhney and Ms.Purnima but there was no response. After dialing other numbers, finally the complainant was able to talk to Ms. Radhika, one of employee of the OP who further assured the complainant to send the layout through mail and finally the complainant got the layout on 12.04.2019 and approved immediately on the same day. The complainant again after waiting for days contacted the OPs to further initiate the progress and the complainant was told by the OP that the work can be started after the payment  of 70% of the project cost.The complainant even assured the Op that he would make the full payment of the project cost in one go if the OPs reach the site with the material as he had started losing faith in them.The complainant was badly humiliated by the employee of the company,namely,Mr.Anubhav.  After that, the complainant sent various e-mails to cancel the deal and to refund his token money Rs.5000/- but the OP have has maliciously denying it on one pretext or the other. The OPs in one of the e-mails have made false claim of forfeiting the money on the pretext of cancellation charges of the work order after it has been confirmed as per payment terms of the work order.  The Op has with malign intentions defrauded the complainant by taking an advance of Rs.5000/- with intention  not to provide the services and material required for a solar system to work/installed. Hence, the present complaint.

2.                 Notices were issued to the Op   through registered post on 12.09.2019(vide registered post No.RH380454099IN)which were not received back either served or unserved despite the expiry of 30 days from the issuance of notices to Op; hence it was deemed to be served and thus, due to non appearance of OP, they were proceeded ex-parte by this Forum vide order dated 18.10.2019.

3.                 To prove his case, the complainant has tenderedhisaffidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-3 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

4.                 We have heard thelearned counsel for the complainant and gone through the record carefully and minutely.

5.                It is evident from the perusal of Mark-A that the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.5000/- to the OP for the purchase and installation of 3KW Grid Solar Power Plant at his residence.  The complainant requested the OP to install the said solar plant at the earliest for which the complainant made several requests to the OP, but, the OP insisted for payment of 70% of the project cost to start the work. Since the complainant was not satisfied with the response of the Op during telephonic conversation with them and doubted the project may not be started by the OP even after receipt of 70% of the project cost, he asked the OP to start the work and he will pay 100% of project cost when material reaches at the site. However, the OP insisted for 70% of the payment first. Since, there was mutual distrust, hence, the complainant cancelled the contract and asked  the OP to refund the token money of Rs.5,000/-. However, despite several requests as evident from Annexures C-3 (colly) the OP failed to refund the amount of Rs.5,000/-.

6.                The OP has not contested the averments made in the complaint as the Op has been proceeded against ex parte, for which adverse inference is liable to be drawn against them. The non-appearance of the OP despite notice shows that it has nothing to say in its defence or against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions made by the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.

7.                In view of above discussion, we have no hesitation to conclude that there has been lapse and deficiency on the part of the Op while rendering the services to the complainant and hence, the complainant is entitled to relief.

8.                As a sequel to above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions:-

                                     (i)     The Op is directed to refun the amount of Rs. 500/- (received as token money from the complainant)       along with interesr @ 9% per annumto the complainant from the filing of complaint till realization.

(ii)     The Op shall pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment.

(iii)    The Op shall pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant on account of litigation charges.

 

9.                The OP shall comply with the order within a period of 30 days from the date of communication of copy of this order, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Forum for initiation of proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of CP Act, against the OP No.1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties of the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance.

 Announced on: 26.02.2020

 

Dr.SushmaGarg    Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini            Satpal         

          Member                Member                                   President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

 

                                                Dr.SushmaGarg                      

Member