COMPLAINT FILED: 26.06.2009<br /> DISPOSED ON: 03.02.2010 <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> 03rd FEBRUARY 2010<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> <br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.1496/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Mr. Vamsi Jayaprasad,<br /> S/o T.Rajamannar,<br /> R/at No.507 & 506P,<br /> Sy. No.215/1, New Khata No.628,<br /> Begur Village, Vishapriya Layout,<br /> Bangalore – 560 056. <br /> <br /> Advocate: Sri. Inayathulla<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTY M/s Bharti Gaurav. U.T.,<br /> U.T. Associates,<br /> Rep: by Bharti Gaurav,<br /> Office at No.18/19, 1st Floor,<br /> No.5, K.S.R.T.C. Layout,<br /> Opt Masala Restaurant,<br /> Uttarahalli Main Road,<br /> Bangalore – 560 082.<br /> <br /> Advocate: Sri. R. Srinivas<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of CP Act 1986, by the complainant, seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- which includes Rs.3,70,000/- advance paid towards construction of the 5th and 6th phase of the project, Rs.60,000/- paid towards rent for alternative accommodation and Rs.2,60,000/- towards the cost of the rectification to be made on the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. <br /> <br /> 2. The brief averments made in this complaint are as fallows: <br /> <br /> Complainant entrusted the construction work of his residential building at site No.628, Begur Village, Vishwa Priya Layout, Begur Hobli, Bangalore to OP, who claim to be well known Architectural Consultant, Interior Designer and Civil Engineer. OP promised to put up the construction as per sanctioned plan and working plan, Ex C-1 and Ex C-2. Complainant entered into contract on 25.11.2007 as per Ex C-3 and it was renewed on 01.07.2008. OP promised to complete the said construction at a total sum of Rs.17,00,000/-. Though complainant in all paid Rs.17,00,000/- before completion of 6th phase, which is required to be payable after completion of 6th phase, OP failed to complete the construction work and left the work incomplete. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant went in futile. On 28.04.2009 complainant caused the legal notice to OP to complete the 6th and 7th phase work. OP gave the untenable reply on 04.06.2009. Complainant gave the counter reply to OP denying the illegal demand made by the OP. Inspite of service of counter reply there is no answer from the OP. OP failed to leave the set back area as per specification; mistakes and damages caused cannot be rectified at any cost, which was assessed by the Civil Engineer. The said Civil Engineer filed his affidavit in support of the complaint averments. Complainant for no fault of his is forced to spend Rs.60,000/- on rent in alternative accommodation. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly. <br /> <br /> 3. On admission and registration of the complaint notice is sent to OP. Sri. B.S. Advocate filed power for OP on 10.08.2009. Inspite of giving sufficient opportunity OP did not file version or affidavit. Hence taken as version not filed. <br /> <br /> 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments complainant filed the affidavit evidence of his own and produced some documents and also filed affidavit of CW-2 Mr. C.P. Rama Krishna, Civil Engineer along with the detail report of estimated cost to rectify the defects part of the work completed and cost incurred along with sanctioned plans. Further complainant filed witness affidavit of CW-3 S.Shankar Reddy who is the landlord of the complainant and produced rent agreement and rental receipts. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard. <br /> <br /> 5. It is the case of the complainant that he availed the service of the OP for the construction of his residential building at site No.628, Begur Village, Vishwa Priya Layout, Bangalore South Taluk. OP promised to put up the construction work as per sanctioned plan and working plan Ex C-1 and C-2. An agreement of construction came to be executed between the complainant and OP on 23.11.2007 as per Ex C-3. It is further renewed on 01.07.2008. Copy of the said agreement is produced. OP promised to complete the construction work at a total sum of Rs.17,00,000/- complainant paid amount to OP at slab rate / stage wise construction as per Ex C-3.<br /> <br /> 1st Phase Rs.2,70,000/-<br /> 2nd Phase Rs.3,20,000/-<br /> 3rd Phase Rs.3,20,000/-<br /> 4th Phase Rs.3,20,000/-<br /> <br /> upto 4th phase though agreed cost of construction was Rs.10,25,000/- but complainant paid Rs.12,30,000/- i.e., Rs.2,05,000/- extra. In 5th Phase Rs.2,70,000/- towards roofing plumbing works, electrical piping, fixing of doors, windows, frames etc., Towards 6th Phase work complainant instead of Rs.3,85,000/- agreed amount, paid Rs.2,00,000/- to OP, deducting Rs.1,85,000/- towards cost of tiles and cladding which will be supplied by the complainant himself to the OP. OP failed to complete 6th phase work and further failed to take up 7th Phase of the construction work and to complete the project. OP failed to leave the set back area as per specification. The mistakes and damages caused by OP cannot be rectified. Though OP received more than agreed amount failed to complete the work. Even the Civil Engineer filed his affidavit evidence in support of complaint averments, listed and confirmed the defects. Inspite of services legal notice and counter reply OP failed to rectify the defects and gave untenable reply. <br /> <br /> 6. Complainant got filed affidavit evidence of his own along with documents and the affidavit evidence of Civil Engineer CW-2, Sri. C.P.Ramakrishna, along with the report of estimated cost to rectify the defects. The report is produced. Further sanction plan, working plan payment structure, statement of account’s, photos, correspondences, legal notice and reply notice are produced. CW-3, the landlord of complainant filed affidavit evidence stating complainant is his tenant since the year 2001 & paying rent of Rs.10,000/- per month from December – 2008 to till date. <br /> <br /> 7. The evidence of the complainant finds full corroboration with the contents of the above undisputed documents and evidences. There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainant. It is a quality of evidence is more important than that of the quantity. OP has not filed version inspite of giving sufficient opportunity. Though OP Advocate filed power did not appear afterwards. Hence Forum can draw the inference that OP admits all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. Complainant invested his hard earned money to get constructed a suitable defect free residential house. Though OP enjoyed the fruits of the said investment made by the complainant, unfortunately failed to construct the building as per the agreed contract and left the work in complete. This act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service. This hostile attitude of the OP must have caused both mental agony and financial loss to the complainant. Under the circumstances we find it is a fit case wherein complainant deserves certain reliefs. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.3,70,000/- advance amount paid towards 5th and 6th phase of the project and to pay Rs.60,000/- towards rent expenses incurred by the complainant and Rs.2,60,000/- towards cost of attending defects and deficiencies as pointed out by the engineer and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-; totally Rs.6,92,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within one month from the date of communication of this order. <br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 3rd day of February 2010.) <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> Snm<br /> <br />