BEFORE THE DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KHURDA, BHUBANESWAR:
-ooOoo-
C.D.CASE NO. 217/2018
Sri Hrusikesh Mohapatra, aged about 67 years,
S/o Late Kasinath Mohapatra, Plot No.48/1288
Bhimeswar Marg Lane No.14,
PO: Bhubaneswar – 751002,
PS: Airfield, Dist - Khurda
…. Complainant
-Vrs.-
- M/s Priya Agencies-cum-M/s Pattnaik Bore Well –cum-
M/s Pattanaik Agency, represented through its
Proprietor, Sri Prabhat Pattnaik.
Plot No.635/ 3097, Ebaranga, Kapila Prasad,
PO: Bhubaneswar – 751002,
PS: Airfield, Dist – Khurda.
- Sri Prabhat Pattnaik, resident of Plot No.709,
Sundarapada, Near Tin Factory,
PO: Bhubaneswar – 751002,
PS: Airfield, Dist – Khurda.
For the complainant … In person
For the O.Ps … Exparte
Date of filing : 27/08/2018
Date of disposal : 23/09/2019
ORDER
MR.B.R.SWAIN, MEMBER :
1. The case has been filed by the complainant U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986 to direct the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.67,500/- to the complainant along with interest, pay compensation for harassment and mental agony and cost of litigation.
2. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant wanted to have a bore well in his land for which he contacted the OPs who are indulged in activity of digging bore well. The OPs agreed to dig bore well and accordingly selected the place for making bore well at the complainant’s site. On 03/04/2018 at about 5:30 PM the field man of the OPs namely Gutu Pattanaik came to the complainant’s plot along with the bore well machine and workers and started digging. They completed the boring work at about 1 AM on 04/04/2018 and told the complainant that the bore well is 200 ft depth and 9 pieces of PVC pipes with 5 inches diameter has been used for this purpose and advised the complainant to purchase a submersible pump with necessary accessories. The complainant purchased the same and on 11/04/2018 the field man of the OPs tested the submersible pump and found OK and fitted it in the bore well with the held of PHD mason hired by the complainant. But to the utter disappointment no water came out of the bore well for which the complaint brought it to the notice of the OPs and asked them to do the needful. The OPs assured to detect the defect in the boring work and to rectify the same within a short time but failed to do so. Though the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.67,500/- to the OPs towards the drilling charges and cost of PVC pipes against the bill for the boring work as demanded by the OPs, but even after completion of more than two months from the date of boring, the complainant was not able to get water from the bore well for the defects committed by the OPs. So to the failure the complainant sent a legal notice to the OPs on 17/06/2018 vide Annexure – 3, through his advocate requesting therein to rectify the defects and ensured that the complainant would get pure water from the bore well installed by the OPs. Though the legal notice had been received by the OPs but they did not respond to it. Hence being aggrieved on such acts of the OPs, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the case is filed with prayer stated at Para – 1 above.
3. Upon notice, the OPs did not appear and file their written version to contest the case, hence they have been set exparte and exparte hearing was taken up.
4. During the hearing of the case, the complainant submitted that despite of several approaches when the OPs did not rectify the defects in the bore well, he himself checked it and found the bore well has been drilled only 120 ft depth. But he has paid for 200 ft drilling along with required PVC pipes charges amounting to Rs.67,500/- as had been told and demanded by the OPs. The complainant further submitted that for the wrong done by the OPs, the submersible pump which he had purchased by spending an amount of Rs.17,688/- has became useless. So the OPs are liable to compensate the complainant.
The above submission with material facts averred in the complaint petition in shape of affidavit, remained unchallenged and uncontroverted as the OPs took no steps to contest the case.
5. It appears from the record that the complainant has spent Rs.36,900/- towards bore well digging charges and Rs.30,600/- towards cost of the PVC pipes used for the bore well installation. So after spending such huge amount of Rs.67,500/- and not getting water out of the bore well due to the faulty work done by the OPs, the sole purpose of the complainant for digging bore well at his place is defeated. And on repeated requests by the complainant, neither the OPs rectified the defects in the bore well nor responded to the legal notice of the complainant which in our opinion amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. So in our considered view, the ends of justice would suffice if direction is given to the OPs to return the amount taken by them from the complainant for the digging and installation of the bore well in question to the complainant. Hence it is ordered that :-
ORDER
The complaint is hereby allowed exparte against the OPs with cost. The OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.67,500/- (Rupees sixty seven thousand five hundred) only to the complainant along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this case i.e. 27/08/2018 till the date of actual payment. The OPs shall further liable to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant. The order is to be complied with by the OPs jointly & severally within a period of one month from the date of communication, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to execute the same against the OPs in accordance with law.
The order is pronounced on this day the 23rd September, 2019 under the seal & signature of the President and Members of the Forum.
(MR.B.R.SWAIN)
MEMBER
Dictated & corrected by me
Member
I agree I agree
Member (W) President
Transcribed by Smt.M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno :
