The District Consumer Forum here has directed a power solutions company to return a sum of over Rs 2 lakh taken in advance from a temple trust in Palghar district for installing solar power system due to deficiency in service.Forum president Sneha Mhatre and members comprising Madhuri Vishwarupe and N D Kadam had on December 23 directed M/s Meenaxi Power Saver to return the amount of Rs 2.60 lakh to Jeevdani Devi Mandir, Virar, at 9 per cent interest from September, 2011 onwards, besides compensation for petition expenditure.
The temple authorities, in their complaint, said that they had entered into a contract with the company for installation of solar power system in the temple complex in August, 2011. A sum of Rs 5,15,411 was decided as the cost to carry out the work.It was also agreed that the temple would give the company 30 old batteries, for which the contractor would give a rebate of Rs 50,000 in the bill.
The work of installation of the solar power system was to be completed by December, 2011, the contract stated, and accordingly, an advance of Rs 2.10 lakh was given to the contractor, along with the 30 old batteries.However, the company did not undertake the installation work, and the notices sent in this regard also went unanswered, the temple authorities alleged.
In the complaint filed with the Forum, the temple trust sought 24 per cent interest on the amount paid in advance to the company, and Rs 15,000 as compensation for the mental and physical harassment, besides petition expenses.The Forum perused the documentary evidence and ruled against the company for having violated the terms of the contract. In an ex parte judgement, M/s Meenaxi Power Saver was found guilty of deficiency in service.
The respondent was directed to give the refund of Rs 2.60 lakh with 9 per cent interest from September, 2011, besides Rs 10,000 for the petition expenses to the temple trust.The Forum further stated that as the trust is not a human being, the question of mental and physical harassment does not not arise and does not warrant compensation.
Source: PTI
