DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB : PRESIDENT
Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER
Wednesday the 20th day of March 2024
CC.50/2024
Complainant
Siddikh,
S/o. Assankutti,
Kundiyottukuni (HO),
Kunnathara, Kannure,
Ulliyeri, Koyilandi,
Kozhikode.
(By Adv.Sri. C. Lalkishore)
Opposite Parties
- Reecco Energy India Pvt. Ltd,
Rep. by Director,
Blgd. No. IV/219 B3 & B4, Pala Road,
Chunkam, Thodupuzha,
Kerala - 685584
- Director,
Reecco Energy India Pvt. Ltd,
Blgd. No. IV/219 B3 & B4, Pala Road,
Chunkam, Thodupuzha,
Kerala - 685584
ORDER
By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
- The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The opposite parties are engaged in the installation of Solar Power Generating System. The complainant is a consumer bearing No. 1166181038942 of the opposite parties. The complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite parties for installation of 5 KWP Solar Power Generating System under Soura Program in his residential house. The total project cost was Rs.2,26,437/-.An advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- was paid to the account of the opposite parties in the ICICI Bank by the complainant.
- As per the instruction of the opposite parties, the complainant cut and removed one mahagony tree and jack tree from the premises of his house for enabling the installation of the Solar Power Generating System. The opposite parties had agreed that the installation would be made within one month. Though the complainant, who is working abroad, came to the native place for this purpose, the opposite parties did not take any steps to install the Solar Power Generating System in his house. When he contacted the opposite parties, it was assured that the installation would be done within 15 days. But nothing happened thereafter. The opposite parties are not even attending the phone calls. The act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade and business practice and it also amounts to deficiency of service. Hence the complaint to direct the opposite parties to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- with interest, along with compensation.
- Though the notice issued from this commission was duly served on the opposite parties, they remained absent and hence set ex-parte.
- The points that arise for determination in this complaint are; 1) Whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, as alleged?
2) Reliefs and costs.
- PW1 was examined and Ext A1 was marked.
- Heard.
- Point No 1: The complainant has approached this Commission alleging unfair trade and business practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The specific allegation is that the opposite parties failed to install the Solar Power Generation System in the house of the complainant despite receiving Rs. 1,00,000/- as advance.
- The son and the power of attorney holder of the complainant was examined as PW1, who has filed proof affidavit in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. Ext A1 is the cash receipt dated 13/03/2023. Ext A1 shows that the total project cost was Rs. 2,26,437/- and on 13/03/2023, the opposite parties had received an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as advance from the complainant.
- The evidence of PW1 stands unchallenged. The opposite parties have not turned up to file version. The opposite parties have not adduced any evidence to disprove the averments in the complaint or to rebut the veracity of the documents produced and marked on the side of the complainant. The case of the complainant stands proved through the testimony of PW1 and Ext A1. Unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties stands proved. The complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs.1,00,000/- paid by him as advance to the opposite parties. Undoubtedly, the act of the opposite parties has resulted in gross mental agony and hardship to the complainant, for which, he is entitled to be compensated adequately. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs.25,000/- will be reasonable compensation in this case. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 3,000/- as cost of the proceedings. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable.
- Point No. 2:- In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows;
a) CC.50/2024 is allowed in part.
b) The opposite parties are hereby directed to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the complaint ie, 25/01/2024 till actual payment.
c) The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony and hardship suffered.
d) The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) as cost of the proceedings to the complainant. e) The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Commission on this, the 20th day of March, 2024.
Date of Filing: 25/01/2024
Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext.A1 – Cash receipt dated 13/03/2023.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Nil.
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 - Muhammed Unais.K.K,( Power of attorney holder of the complainant)
Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER
True Copy,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar.
