Noida: After spending Rs 12 lakh on a solar power system to cope with rising electricity bills, a Noida resident found the system provided backup for barely two hours. The district consumer disputes redressal commission on Sept 15 ordered installer ARS Enterprises to refund the entire amount, along with 6% interest and Rs 5,000 in litigation costs, within 30 days.Commission president Anil Kumar Pundir and member Anju Sharma held that the firm, dealing in Smarten Solar Power Conditioning Units, committed a service deficiency by failing to repair the solar system. “The solar system provided only two hours of backup, indicating that the system was of extremely poor quality. The opposing firm should refund the amount paid for the solar system to the complainant. Upon refund, the opposing firm is allowed to take back the solar system. The complaint is admissible,” the commission ruled.On May 11, 2025, Sector 51 resident Krishna Yadav filed a complaint with the commission against the Greater Noida-based firm, alleging he was supplied a malfunctioning/substandard power unit.Yadav told the commission that he had got a loan of Rs 7,80,000 of the total amount to buy and install the solar power system. The system, however, would only provide two hours of backup from early in its installation and later stopped working altogether. When Yadav reached out to the firm, the firm promised to resolve the problem soon. The dealer arranged for a service engineer, Manish Kumar, who visited Yadav to assess the fault.After the inspection, the engineer told Yadav the product was of very poor quality and might not work correctly even after repairs. “The engineer categorically said that, if I face any trouble after he repairs the unit, I should approach the dealer,” Yadav said, adding that, as per his apprehension, the system once again stopped working after giving a backup for one hour after the repair.Yadav contacted the firm once again but did not receive a satisfactory response. He then contacted the customer care service of the unit manufacturer, Smarten Power Systems, and filed a complaint, but the problem remained unresolved.The commission initially issued the company a notice and, in the absence of a representation or counterclaim, decided to continue with the proceedings ex parte on April 10, 2026.Having perused the documents, the commission said, “The complainant submitted an affidavit in support of his allegations whereas the opposing firm has not presented any evidence to refute them. The complainant’s irrefutable evidence establishes the allegations.”
