BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.227/12.

Date of instt.: 07.09.2012. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 14.07.2015.

Shri Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Bhalla Ram, R/o Duni Chand Patti Village Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

Shri Baldev Singh S/o Jogi Ram R/o Village Lohri Patti Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

..……..Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Rajesh Vadhera, Advocate for the opposite party.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  It is alleged that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  It is further alleged that the Op has finished the work of paving and fixing of floor marbles in the house of complainant about 15 days and the Op assured that the complainant can get the marbles finished with finishing machine after 10 days.  It is further alleged that after 10 days, the complainant got the floor marbles finished with finishing machine but on finishing the marbles, it is revealed that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  It is further alleged that even due uneven level of marbles, doors of the house of complainant are also not closed properly and due to uneven level of the marbles, the water of house remains standing on the floor and the Op has not paved the marbles in proper way and in zero level to discharge the water.  It is further alleged that due to paving of floor marbles in uneven level, the complainant has suffered a loss of more than Rs.2,50,000/- lacs.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; non-joinder of necessary parties and concealment of facts.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant had constructed his farm house for the commercial use.  The complainant never employed the respondent.  It is incorrect and denied that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marble in the same level or the Op has fixed the marble in uneven level.  The other contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties led their evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant vehemently contends that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the Op contends that the complainant never employed the respondent.  The respondent has not constructed the farm house of complainant.  The complainant has also tendered in evidence affidavit of Dal Singh son of Sh. Chhaju Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW2/B and affidavit of Sh. Ram Mehar son of Sh. Anant Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW3/C but the said persons are not expert persons and the said affidavits are not sufficient to prove the case of complainant.  So, on careful perusal of all the record available on the file, we find that the complainant has failed to produce any contract or agreement on the record which could prove that the complainant engaged the respondent for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house and there was any negligence on the part of Op.  The complainant has also failed to produce any expert evidence which could prove that there was any negligence on the part of Op.  So, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Op.

7.     Thus, in view of above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and dismiss the same.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.14.07.2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.227/12.

Date of instt.: 07.09.2012. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 14.07.2015.

Shri Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Bhalla Ram, R/o Duni Chand Patti Village Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

Shri Baldev Singh S/o Jogi Ram R/o Village Lohri Patti Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

..……..Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Rajesh Vadhera, Advocate for the opposite party.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  It is alleged that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  It is further alleged that the Op has finished the work of paving and fixing of floor marbles in the house of complainant about 15 days and the Op assured that the complainant can get the marbles finished with finishing machine after 10 days.  It is further alleged that after 10 days, the complainant got the floor marbles finished with finishing machine but on finishing the marbles, it is revealed that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  It is further alleged that even due uneven level of marbles, doors of the house of complainant are also not closed properly and due to uneven level of the marbles, the water of house remains standing on the floor and the Op has not paved the marbles in proper way and in zero level to discharge the water.  It is further alleged that due to paving of floor marbles in uneven level, the complainant has suffered a loss of more than Rs.2,50,000/- lacs.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; non-joinder of necessary parties and concealment of facts.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant had constructed his farm house for the commercial use.  The complainant never employed the respondent.  It is incorrect and denied that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marble in the same level or the Op has fixed the marble in uneven level.  The other contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties led their evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant vehemently contends that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the Op contends that the complainant never employed the respondent.  The respondent has not constructed the farm house of complainant.  The complainant has also tendered in evidence affidavit of Dal Singh son of Sh. Chhaju Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW2/B and affidavit of Sh. Ram Mehar son of Sh. Anant Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW3/C but the said persons are not expert persons and the said affidavits are not sufficient to prove the case of complainant.  So, on careful perusal of all the record available on the file, we find that the complainant has failed to produce any contract or agreement on the record which could prove that the complainant engaged the respondent for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house and there was any negligence on the part of Op.  The complainant has also failed to produce any expert evidence which could prove that there was any negligence on the part of Op.  So, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Op.

7.     Thus, in view of above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and dismiss the same.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.14.07.2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.227/12.

Date of instt.: 07.09.2012. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 14.07.2015.

Shri Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Bhalla Ram, R/o Duni Chand Patti Village Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

Shri Baldev Singh S/o Jogi Ram R/o Village Lohri Patti Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

..……..Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Rajesh Vadhera, Advocate for the opposite party.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  It is alleged that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  It is further alleged that the Op has finished the work of paving and fixing of floor marbles in the house of complainant about 15 days and the Op assured that the complainant can get the marbles finished with finishing machine after 10 days.  It is further alleged that after 10 days, the complainant got the floor marbles finished with finishing machine but on finishing the marbles, it is revealed that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  It is further alleged that even due uneven level of marbles, doors of the house of complainant are also not closed properly and due to uneven level of the marbles, the water of house remains standing on the floor and the Op has not paved the marbles in proper way and in zero level to discharge the water.  It is further alleged that due to paving of floor marbles in uneven level, the complainant has suffered a loss of more than Rs.2,50,000/- lacs.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; non-joinder of necessary parties and concealment of facts.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant had constructed his farm house for the commercial use.  The complainant never employed the respondent.  It is incorrect and denied that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marble in the same level or the Op has fixed the marble in uneven level.  The other contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties led their evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant vehemently contends that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the Op contends that the complainant never employed the respondent.  The respondent has not constructed the farm house of complainant.  The complainant has also tendered in evidence affidavit of Dal Singh son of Sh. Chhaju Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW2/B and affidavit of Sh. Ram Mehar son of Sh. Anant Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW3/C but the said persons are not expert persons and the said affidavits are not sufficient to prove the case of complainant.  So, on careful perusal of all the record available on the file, we find that the complainant has failed to produce any contract or agreement on the record which could prove that the complainant engaged the respondent for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house and there was any negligence on the part of Op.  The complainant has also failed to produce any expert evidence which could prove that there was any negligence on the part of Op.  So, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Op.

7.     Thus, in view of above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and dismiss the same.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.14.07.2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAITHAL.

Complaint no.227/12.

Date of instt.: 07.09.2012. 

                                                 Date of Decision: 14.07.2015.

Shri Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Bhalla Ram, R/o Duni Chand Patti Village Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

                                                        ……….Complainant.      

                                        Versus

Shri Baldev Singh S/o Jogi Ram R/o Village Lohri Patti Bhagal, Tehsil Guhla, Distt. Kaithal.

..……..Opposite Party.

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

Before:           Sh. Jagmal Singh, President.

                        Sh. Rajbir Singh, Member.

     Smt. Harisha Mehta, Member.

Present :        Sh. R.K.Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Rajesh Vadhera, Advocate for the opposite party.

                       ORDER

(JAGMAL SINGH, PRESIDENT).

                       The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, with the averments that he has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  It is alleged that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  It is further alleged that the Op has finished the work of paving and fixing of floor marbles in the house of complainant about 15 days and the Op assured that the complainant can get the marbles finished with finishing machine after 10 days.  It is further alleged that after 10 days, the complainant got the floor marbles finished with finishing machine but on finishing the marbles, it is revealed that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  It is further alleged that even due uneven level of marbles, doors of the house of complainant are also not closed properly and due to uneven level of the marbles, the water of house remains standing on the floor and the Op has not paved the marbles in proper way and in zero level to discharge the water.  It is further alleged that due to paving of floor marbles in uneven level, the complainant has suffered a loss of more than Rs.2,50,000/- lacs.  This way, the Ops are deficient in service.  Hence, this complaint is filed.   

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared before this forum and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus-standi; jurisdiction; non-joinder of necessary parties and concealment of facts.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering Ops.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant had constructed his farm house for the commercial use.  The complainant never employed the respondent.  It is incorrect and denied that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marble in the same level or the Op has fixed the marble in uneven level.  The other contents of complaint are denied and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.    

3.     In support of their case, both the parties led their evidence in the shape of affidavits and documents.  

4.     We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.     We have perused the complaint & reply thereto and also have gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.     Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the complainant has constructed his residential house in Village Bhagal, Distt. Kaithal.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant contends that the complainant has engaged the Op for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house at the rate of Rs.10/- per Sq. Feet and the Op also assured the complainant to fix and pave the floor marbel on zero level.  Ld. Counsel for the complainant vehemently contends that the Op has not paved and fixed the floor marbles in same level but fixed and paved the marbles in uneven level.  On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the Op contends that the complainant never employed the respondent.  The respondent has not constructed the farm house of complainant.  The complainant has also tendered in evidence affidavit of Dal Singh son of Sh. Chhaju Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW2/B and affidavit of Sh. Ram Mehar son of Sh. Anant Ram, r/o Village Bhagal, Ex.CW3/C but the said persons are not expert persons and the said affidavits are not sufficient to prove the case of complainant.  So, on careful perusal of all the record available on the file, we find that the complainant has failed to produce any contract or agreement on the record which could prove that the complainant engaged the respondent for paving floor marbles and paving of brick tiles on the roof of his house and there was any negligence on the part of Op.  The complainant has also failed to produce any expert evidence which could prove that there was any negligence on the part of Op.  So, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of Op.

7.     Thus, in view of above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and dismiss the same.  A copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced.

Dt.14.07.2015.

                                                                (Jagmal Singh),

                                                                President.

                (Harisha Mehta),     (Rajbir Singh),       

                        Member.         Member.