Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

235/2011

Mrs.Devikrishnan alias - Complainant(s)

Versus

A.Raamkumar - Opp.Party(s)

S.Palanivelayutham

04 Sep 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   05.08.2011

                                                                        Date of Order :   04.08.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.235/2011

FRIDAY THIS  4^TH   DAY OF AUGUST 2017

 

Mrs. Devikrishnan alias

Dowmuny Day Doraisamy,

Kadapakkam,

Alambarai Village,

Edaikkazhinadu Town,

Cheyyur Taluk,

Kanchipuram District.                                .. Complainant

                                        ..Vs..

 

A. Raamkumar,

S/o. D. Annamalai,

Prop. Kumar Builders,

25/20, Karpaga Vinayagarkoil Street,

Ekkattuthangal,

Chennai 600 097.                                      .. Opposite party.

 

 

Counsel for Complainant         :    M/s. S. Palanivelayutham & another  

Counsel for opposite party       :    M/s. D.S. Rajasekaran & another   

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay Rs.5,83,864/- towards rectification of defect and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards loss of pay for 8 months and also to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards mental agony for deficiency of service and to pay cost of the complaint.

 1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that she is a NRI proposed to  construct a residential building in her property measuring 2100 sq. ft built up area excluding Over head tank, stair room and sump and entered into an agreement with the opposite party.   The opposite party also agreed to construct the said residential building at the rate of Rs.1500/- per sq. ft.   The opposite party agreed to construct the building for Rs.31,50,000/-.  Immediately after payment of Rs.7,22,200/- as advance by the complainant, the opposite party started the construction work, the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.45,00,000/- towards such construction and the possession was handed over to the complainant in the month of October 2009.  The complainant further state that immediately after the occupation of the building, it was found by the complainant that there was moisture in the bathroom, dining room and walls similarly there are seepage of water throughout the walls having cracks etc.   It is also noted that the septic tank was not properly constructed ; kitchen granite table not properly polished; the compound wall is irregular ; soak pit was not constructed and the building is not properly furnished.   As such the complainant sent a legal notice to the opposite party on 6.5.2011 though he received the notice failed to reply.      As such the act of the opposite party clearly amounts to gross deficiency in service and thereby caused harassment, mental agony  and hardship to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2. The brief averments in Written Version of  the opposite party    are as follows:

        The opposite party state that the opposite party denies each and every allegation except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite party submit that he had entered into an agreement of construction with the complainant on 10.9.2008 for constructing building to the complainant measuring about 2100 sq ft.  of built up area in ground floor except overhead tank, stair room and sump for storage of water.    Further as per the specification of the work, the opposite party will construct the building.   It was specifically agreed that the total cost would be Rs.31,50,000/- if he constructs as per the  specification given in the agreement and in the event of any change, the opposite party is entitled to work out the cost and it would be charged separately.    The above said cost of Rs.31,50,000/- did not include the construction of overhead tank, stair room and sump for storage of water and for constructing the above the opposite party is entitled to charge separately.    As per the agreement the opposite party should complete the construction within 8 months from the date of commencing the work and handover the possession to the complainant.    The opposite party further state that he had received additional amount to the tune of Rs.45 lakhs for the construction, the opposite party has stated the specification is for putting a wooden rafter for the roof and thereafter the complainant had changed to concrete rafter.    The opposite party further submit that there was moisture in the walls of the both room and dining room is common to all the new building to form moisture in some of the walls during the rainy season and it is a minor error.   The complainant had made some false allegation with regard to the construction of the opposite party and most of the allegations common to all the new buildings which has got nothing to do with  the construction  further the leakage and seepage of water is due to the damage done to the tiles by the complainant and the opposite party has no roll to play for the same.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

3.      In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant had filed proof affidavit as hers evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A23 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite party not filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite party and also Ex.C1 marked.

4.   The points for the consideration is:  

 

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,83,864/- towards rectification of defect as prayed for ?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards loss of pay for 8 months and a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards mental agony for deficiency of service with cost as prayed for ?

 

5.      POINTS 1 & 2:

        Heard the complainant counsel.  Perused the records.  The opposite party after filing written version has not come forward to file proof affidavit and written arguments in this case.   The learned counsel for the complainant contended that the complainant is a NRI, proposed to  construct a residential building in her property measuring 2100 sq. ft built up area excluding Over head tank, stair room and sump and entered into an agreement with the opposite party as per Ex.A2.   The opposite party also agreed to construct the said residential building at the rate of Rs.1500/- per sq. ft.   The opposite party agreed to construct the building for Rs.31,50,000/-.  Immediately after payment of Rs.7,22,200/- as advance by the complainant, the opposite party started the construction work, the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.45,00,000/- towards such construction and the construction was compleated and possession was handed over to the complainant in the month of October 2009.  The opposite party also has not denied the payment completion of construction and handing over the possession of house.  The complainant further contended that immediately after the occupation of the building, it was found by the complainant that there was moisture in the bathroom, dining room and walls similarly there are seepage of water throughout, the walls, having cracks etc.   It is also noted that the septic tank was not properly constructed ; kitchen granite slap not properly polished; the compound wall is irregular ; soak pit was not constructed and the building is not properly furnished.   Hence the complainant was constrained to appoint an Engineer to find out the defects and the expenses for rectifying such defects.  The Engineer visited the property and gave an estimate Ex.A7.   The Advocate Commissioner was also appointed by this forum who inspected the property and filed his report stating all the deficiencies and defects.    The complainant expected a sum of Rs.5,83,864/- towards for such repair works.   The complainant is also claiming a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for non occupation of the house for 8 months. But the complainant has not produced any document.  The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency of service.   But it has not been proved the manner known to law.     

6.     The opposite party after filing written version has not come forward to file any proof affidavit to prove the contention raised in the written version.   Equally the opposite party has not come forward to advance any argument.   The contention raised in the written version has not been proved by the opposite party with suitable document also.  But it is very clear from the records that the compensation claimed by the complainant is exorbitant.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant is entitled to a sum Rs.5,83,864/- towards rectifying the defects and compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/- and the points are answered accordingly. 

        In the result, the complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,83,864/-  (Rupees Five lakhs eighty three thousand eight hundred and sixty four only) towards rectifying the defects and compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) towards mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant. 

        The above  amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.       

  Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  4^th   day  of  August 2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainants” side documents:

Ex.A1- 30.10.2006         - Copy of passport of the complainant.

Ex.A2- 10.9.2008  - Copy of builder’s agreement.

Ex.A3-         -       - Copy of payment details made by the complainant.

Ex.A4-         -       - Copy of email communication sent by opposite party.

Ex.A5- 24.7.2009  - Copy of payment receipts.

Ex.A6- 24.7.2009  - Copy of estimation for construction of RCC roof.

Ex.A7- 6.4.2011    - Copy of estimation issued by Engineer,

Ex.A8- 12.4.2001  - Copy of letter issued by the complainant.

Ex.A9- 6.5.2011    - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A10- 20.5.2011         - Copy of letter issued by the engineer.

Ex.A11-23.5.2011 - Copy of letter issued by the CAG to opposite party.

Ex.A12- 7.7.2011  - Copy of reminder letter issued by CAG.

Ex.A13- 13.7.2011         - Copy of estimation for Mangalore Tiles

Ex.A14- 15.7.2011         - Copy of letter issued by the opposite party.

Ex.A15- 1.12.201  - Copy of email communication.

Ex.A16- 9.12.2011         - Copy of email communication

Ex.A17- 19.12.2011- Copy of email communication

Ex.A18- 4.2.2011  - Copy of estimation given by Engineer.

Ex.A19- 4.6.2011  -  Copy of letter issued by the Engineer.

Ex.A20- 7.8.2011  - Copy of payment letter issued by the Engineer.

Ex.A21- 8.8.2011  - Copy of completion report issued by Engineer.

Ex.A22- 9.4.2012  - Copy of final bill issued by the Engineer.

Ex.A23-       -       - Photos series.

Opposite party’s side document: -  

..Nil..

Ex.C1 – Advocate Commissioner Report.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.