Failure To Install Solar System, Kottayam District Commission Holds Reeco Energy Liable of Deficiency In Service

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kottayam (Kerala) bench comprising of V.S. Manulal (President), S. Bindhu (Member) and K.M. Anto (Member) held Reeco Energy India Pvt Ltd liable for deficiency in service for failing to install a solar power generating system even after seven months of receiving advance payment. The District Commission directed it to install the solar system within a specific timeframe and pay a compensation of Rs. 21,000/- to the Complainant. Brief Facts: Mr Prakashan A V (“Complainant”) paid Rs.80,000/- to Reeco Energy India Pvt Ltd (“Reeco”) for the installation of a solar power generation unit in his house. However, no progress was made even after 8 months of the advance payment made by the Complainant. The Complainant, frustrated by the lack of progress, made numerous attempts to communicate with Reeco through telephone conversations. In response, it provided various excuses and assured the Complainant that the installation work would be completed within a few months. Unfortunately, the promised date passed without any action from Reeco. The Complainant visited Reeco's office in Thodupuzha, where they requested additional time. Frustrated with the lack of service and improper business practices of Reeco, the Complainant approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kottayam, Kerala (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against Reeco. Despite receiving notice, Reeco failed to appear or file a version within the statutory period. Observations by the Commission: The District Commission noted that even after seven months of accepting the advance payment for the solar unit installation, Reeco failed to fulfil its obligation to install the solar units. This non-installation by Reeco was deemed a deficiency in service on the part of Reeco. The District Commission held that the service providers are obligated to deliver their services without any faults, imperfections, shortcomings, or inadequacies in quality, nature, and manner of performance. The District Commission cited Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which defines 'deficiency' as any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature, and manner of performance, as required by law or under any contract. The District Commission noted that this definition explicitly includes any act of negligence omission or commission by the service provider that results in loss or injury to the consumer. Resultantly, the District Commission found that the failure of Reeco to install the solar power unit, despite receiving the advance payment, constituted a clear deficiency in service. Consequently, it directed Reeco to promptly install the 3KWp Solar power generating system within a specified timeframe. In the event of failure to comply with this directive, the District Commission directed Reeco to refund the advance amount of Rs. 80,000/- to the Complainant along with interest. Additionally, Reeco was instructed to reimburse the Complainant with Rs. 7,000/- as taxi fare expenses incurred due to the deficiencies in service. Furthermore, the District Commission directed Reeco to pay Rs. 5,000/- for legal costs and Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to the Complainant. Case Title: Prakashan A.V. vs Reeco Energy India Case No.: CC/204/2023 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Failure To Install Solar System, Kottayam District Commission Holds Reeco Energy Liable of Deficiency In Service

Smita Singh

Tags