E-Paper
Mohali firm told to pay compensation for delay in installation of solar plant
Consumer disputes redressal commission also directed Mohali-based firm to pay ₹25,000 compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and ₹11,000 as litigation costs
A consumer court has directed a private solar firm to complete installation of a solar power plant in a house in Sector 18 here, which had been delayed since 2019.
The district consumer disputes redressal commission 2 also directed the Live Braille Wearable Solutions (LBWS) Private Ltd in Sector 82, JLPL, Industrial Area, Mohali to pay ₹25,000 compensation to the complainants for causing mental agony and harassment and ₹11,000 as litigation costs.
As per the judgment, complainants Shamsher Singh Sandhu and Sarabjit Singh Sandhu of Sector 18 alleged that the firm had assured them that if they install a solar power station of 8 kilowatt (KWs), they will not have to pay electricity bills as the power generated by solar panels would set off the entire electricity bill being received. Besides this, it was mandatory to install solar power station of 1 KW upon 1 kanal plot in Chandigarh.
Being allured by these assurances, the complainants agreed to get an 8KW solar power station installed for ₹5.2 lakh on May 14, 2018. They also took a loan for this and averred that the loan was directly disbursed to the firm without even verifying whether the system has been installed.
According to the complainants, the firm took considerable time for its installation and said that even 1.5 years after the payment was made, the system was not made functional while the same was to be erected and made operational within six weeks. The poles were erected on the rooftop in such a manner that cracks developed in the ceiling underneath the poles and the entire roof got damaged. When they complained about this to the firm, the work was abandoned midway and despite repeated requests and reminders, the firm did not take any effort to redress the grievance.
Despite availing numerous opportunities, the firm failed to file a written statement and evidence. The court observed that the defence of the firm was ordered to be struck off and this act of the firm draws an adverse inference that they have nothing to contradict in defence against the allegations made in the complaint and the evidence led by the complainants.
The commission directed the firm to make the solar power plant fully operational.
