Haryana

Karnal

CC/391/2022

Smt. Geeta Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

Statecon Energiaa Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Karan Singh Rana

19 Mar 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No. 391 of 2022

                                                        Date of instt.11.07.2022

                                                        Date of Decision:19.03.2024

 

Smt. Geeta Rani wife of Shri Subhash Chand proprietor of M/s Kanha Kissan Sewa Kendra, Bhadson, tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Statecon Energiaa Pvt. Ltd. Khasra no.509, village Chhijarsi, Kulich Nagar, P.O. Pilkhuawa, tehsil Dhaulana, District Panchsheel Nagar UP-245304 through its Managing Director.
2. Shri Vaibhav Garg, B-81, Sector-63, Noida c/o Statecon Energiaa Pvt. Ltd.
3. M/s Saan Vee International solar PV energy services plot no.271, Aasandh Road, near Aneja Filling Station Panipat 132103 (Haryana) Mobile no.9198120-12401.

       

                                                                …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.      

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr.  Suman Singh…..Member

 

 Argued by:  Sh. Karan Singh Rana, counsel for the complainant.

                    Opposite parties  no.1 and 2 exparte.

                    Shri Yashpal Sharma, counsel for the OP no.3.

 

                     (Vineet Kaushik, Member)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is the sole proprietor of M/s Kanha Kissan Sewa Kendra Bhadson, tehsil Indri, District Karnal and vide purchase order dated 20.02.2020, the OPs had installed 10KWP hybrid solar plant at  the roof of canopy of this petrol pump at the total project cost including GST to the tune of Rs.8,23,825/-, vide invoice no.2021/PL/4/00010 dated 28.07.2020. Vide letter no.SEPL/IOCL/PV/NS/446 dated 24.03.2018, the Statcon Energiaa i.e. OP no.1 had given warranty of each item mentioned therein that the panels shall be mounted on GI plated Frames. The GI Structure is designed of roop top on 150Km/HR (wind speed) of AI Structure for canopy base with a warranty of 5 years. Unfortunately, in the month of June 2021, a strong wind storm came in this area and as a result, many panel structure gave way due to poor quality and defective installation. Resultantly, some pieces of panels got broken and because of this damage, the electrical energy of the solar system decreased considerably. In order to make the structure in proper working condition, the complainant had requested the OPs time and again but they did not pay any heed, went on insisting to deposit a huge amount of Rs.60,000/- as maintenance charges and Rs.25,000/- as cost of replacement of broken pieces of panels unmindful of the fact that the structure in question is under warranty and the OPs are legally liable to replace the same and reinstall the structure under warranty without charging any extra amount, as the product and structure could not withstand the impact of storm. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 04.10.2021. In reply to the said notice, OPs sent a letter dated 20.10.2021, admitting thereby that as per spot inspection revealed that three panels were damaged due to high electric voltage and asked the complainant that the damaged solar panels would be repaired/replaced for which a quotation shall be mailed to the firm. OPs asked the complainant to pay Rs.5016/- as cost of repair works and repair would be carried out promptly on receipt of the said amount. Complainant sent the said amount of Rs.5020/- to the firm through cheque/NFT dated 10.12.2021 telling them that because of the damaged structure, the complainant is facing 10% loss out of total capacity of solar system daily, vide letter dated 16.11.2021 but of no avail. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs no.1 and 2  did not appear despite service and opted to be proceeded against exparte, vide order dated 10.01.2023 of the Commission.

3.             On notice, OP no.3 appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that OP no.3 has no concerned/connection between the dispute of complainant and OPs no.1 and 2. The OP no.3 has not installed the penal nor received any money and did not provide any kind of service to the complainant. It is further pleaded that OP no.3 has been impleaded as unnecessarily whereas in the whole complaint the complainant failed to prove the connection between the complainant and the OP no.3. OP no.3 has no concerned with the OPs no.1 and 2. OP no.3 neither purchased anything from the OP no.3 now the OP installed the alleged 10 KWP Hybrid solar plant as alleged. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

5.             Complainant has tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, affidavit of Krishan Kumar working as Manager Ex.CW2/B, copy of repair/replacement of damaged equipment of 10KW solar plant notice by Sushil Singh Tanwar Ex.C1, copy of legal notice dated 04.10.2021 Ex.C2, copy of reply of said legal notice Ex.C3, copy of deposit/pay in slip of Rs.5020/- Ex.C4, copy of letter to Shri A.K.Saxena Advocate Ex.C5, copy of purchase order dated 28.02.2020 Ex.C6,  copy of letter dated 04.07.2021 to Statecon Ex.C7, copy of reply of A.K. Saxena Ex.C8, copy of tax invoice Statecon Ex.C9, copy of proposal of Statecon Energiaa Ex.C10, copy of Engineer’s report Ex.C11, copy of electricity bill Ex.C12 and closed the evidence on 08.05.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP no.3 has tendered into evidence affidavit of Venus Kumar Ex.OP3/A and closed the evidence on 28.02.2024 by suffering separate statement.

7.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

8.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that OPs had installed 10KWP hybrid solar plant at the roof of canopy of complainant’s petrol pump. The total project cost was to the tune of Rs.8,23,825/-. OP no.1 had given warranty of 5 years on the said product. In the month of June 2021, a strong wind came in this area and as a result, panel structure gave way due to poor quality and defective installation. The some pieces of panels got broken and because of this damage, the electrical energy of the solar system decreased. The complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.60,000/- as maintenance charges and Rs.25,000/- as cost of replacement of broken pieces of panels whereas the structure is under warranty and the OPs are legally liable to replace the same and reinstall the structure  without charging any extra amount, as the product and structure could not withstand the impact of storm. OPs asked the complainant to pay Rs.5016/- as cost of repair works and complainant sent the said amount to the OPs and said that he is facing a huge loss of electricity because of the fault of the defective solar plant due to weak structure and requested to repair/replace the damaged penal but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint. Learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon the case law of Hon’ble Supreme Court titled as Debashis Sinha and others Versus M/s R.N.R. Enterprise representative by its proprietor/Chairman, Kolkata and others in Civil Appeal no.3343 of 2020, date of decision 09.02.2023 and Om Parkash Gupta Vs. Ranbir B.Goyal in Civil Appeal no.5460 of 1999, date of decision 18.01.2002, which have been perused by us.

9.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP no.3, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that OP no.3 has no concerned/connection between the dispute of complainant and OPs no.1 and 2. The OP no.3 has not installed the penal nor received any money and did not provide any kind of service to the complainant. OP no.3 has been impleaded as unnecessarily whereas in the whole complaint the complainant failed to prove the connection between the complainant and the OP no.3. OP no.3 has no concerned with the OPs no.1 and 2. OP no.3 neither purchased anything from the OP no.3  lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint qua OP no.3.

10.           We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

11.           Complainant has alleged that OPs have given five years warranty of each item by saying that the solar panels shall be mounted on GI plated frames but due to poor quality and defective installation, some pieces of panels got broken and as a result of which, the electrical energy of the solar system decreased. To prove her version, complainant has placed on file her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, affidavit of Krishan Kumar working as Manager Ex.CW2/B, copy of repair/replacement of damaged equipment of 10KW solar plant notice by Sushil Singh Tanwar Ex.C1, copy of legal notice dated 04.10.2021 Ex.C2, copy of reply of said legal notice Ex.C3, copy of deposit/pay in slip of Rs.5020/- Ex.C4, copy of letter to Shri A.K.Saxena Advocate Ex.C5, copy of purchase order dated 28.02.2020 Ex.C6,  copy of letter dated 04.07.2021 to Statecon Ex.C7, copy of reply of A.K. Saxena Ex.C8, copy of tax invoice Statecon Ex.C9, copy of proposal of Statecon Energiaa Ex.C10, copy of Engineer’s report Ex.C11, copy of electricity bill Ex.C12, which have been perused by us. On perusal of the said documents, it is clear that solar system has become defective within warranty period and OPs no.1 and 2 have failed to repair/replace the same within warranty period. To rebut the evidence produced by the complainant, OPs no.1 and 2 did not appear and opted to be proceeded against exparte. Thus, the evidence produced by the complainant is unchallenged and unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the same.  It is the duty of the OPs no.1 and 2 either to repair the defective solar system or to replace the same within warranty period but OPs have failed to do so.

12.           Keeping in view the ratio of the law laid down in the abovesaid authorities, the facts and circumstances of the present complaint, we are of the considered view that the act of the OPs no.1 and 2 amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. There is no role of the OP no.3, hence the complaint qua OP no.3 stands dismissed.

13.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs no.1 and 2 to repair the solar plant free of costs. It is made clear, if the said solar plant is not repairable then the same be replaced by the OPs no.1 and 2 with new one of the best quality and the same value. We further direct the OPs no.1 and 2 to pay Rs.25,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by her and Rs.11,000/-for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:19.03.2024                                      

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Suman Singh)

                          Member                          Member