IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2023
Present: Sri.Manulal.V.S, President
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member
Sri.K.M.Anto, Member
CC No.01/2019 (Filed on 04/01/2019)
Complainant : George Thomas,S/o E.V.Thomas, residing at Inchakattu, Sindia Enclave,
Devalokam, Kottayam
(By Adv.K.J.Kurian)
Vs
Opposite party : Bijumon M.A, Proprietor,
Central Pile Foundation and Constructions, Mullankuzhy
Malakunnam.P.O, Changanassery.
(By Adv.Georgekutty C.A)
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
The brief facts of the complainant’s case are as follows:- The complainant constructed a house at Kanjikuzhy, Kottayam. The nature of soil where the construction was made required piling to a depth of 12.5 to 15 meters. The complainant entrusted the piling work with the opposite party. The opposite party made the piling operations for the construction of the building. The opposite party informed that the piling was done as directed by the complainant. After the piling operations, a 2 - story building having a plinth area of 272.8 Sq. meters was constructed in the said location. The cost of the building including piling operations is up to Rs.74,00,000/-. The complainant started residing in the building in May 2017. Then it is found that many cracks started widening and spreading across all parts of the building. After proper study of the site by a structural engineer, he concluded that the building is cracking because of faulty piling resulting in failure of many piles altogether. Due to the growing number of cracks and their enlargement day by day the complainant was advised by the structural engineer to shift the residence from the house as it is not safe to reside in the building. The complainant and family shifted from the building from March 2018.
The complainant had spent Rs.9,50,000/- for the piling operations conducted by the opposite party. As a result of rash, careless and negligent piling operations of the building, the entire building has become defective and unworthy for residence.
This caused serious loss and damage and extreme mental pain and agony to the complainant and his family members. The act of deficiency in their service on the part of the opposite party caused huge damage to the complainant. This complaint is filed for getting a compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- with 12% interest along with cost, for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite party. The opposite party appeared and filed the version.
The version of the opposite party is as follows. The opposite party had undertaken the piling works of the complainant as per quotation dated 12/11/2015. The quotation was given for the labour works of the piling by Auger Method (Manual piling). The piling works were carried out as per the direction of the Engineer Prasad. The complainant had deputed a supervisor for the piling works.
The opposite party is not aware of the plinth area of the building and alleged cracks in the building. The structural engineer of the complainant never raised any complaint regarding any of the work done by the opposite party in the site. The opposite party is not aware of the advice of the structural engineer and the shifting of the house from March 2018.The allegation that Rs.9,50,000/- was spent for the piling work is not correct.
IF there is any defect in the building of the complainant that may occur due to poor workmanship in the construction of the building, low quality materials used, improper curing, lack of adequate steel, cement and other materials used for the construction of the building etc. It is known that after the house warming, while the complainant was residing there, the floor of the house has gone down 20 cm while the structure of the building remained there intact. This has happened due to the poor quality of construction works of the super structure.
The opposite party has received labour charges for the measured works only as per the specified rates. The opposite party did the piling works at the places and spots shown by the engineer and complainant.
The work began on 07/01/2016 and on 08/01/2016 while the work was in progress, underground obstructions occurred at 4 places and the piling work was done only up to a depth of 4 meters due to the obstructions. Then the complainant and engineer asked to stop the work temporarily. On the suggestion of the engineer Rotary piling (machine piling) was done. The remaining work was begun on 19/01/16 and was completed on 29/01/16, by machine piling.
Altogether 23 piles were erected by the opposite party from 07/01/2016 to 29/01/2016 at the place pointed by the engineer of the complainant. Out of this except 4 piles all other piles having a depth of 13.50 to 17.40 meters. The 4 piles bored and erected were having depth 3 to 4.30 meters. The work was satisfactorily completed by the opposite party and the complainant settled the final bill on 30/01/2016 by paying Rs.4,25,815/-. There is no deficiency in the service on the part of the opposite party.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents as Ext.A1 to Ext.A.24. The opposite party filed proof affidavit and marked documents Ext.B1 and Ext.B2.
The complainant was examined as PW1 and a witness (Engineer) from the side of the complainant was examined as PW2. The opposite party was examined as DW1.
On the basis of the complaint, version of the opposite party and evidence adduced we would like to consider the following points.
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No1 and 2 together.
Ongoing through the complaint, version of the opposite party and evidence it is evident that the piling work for the construction of the proposed house of the complainant was entrusted to the opposite party. Ext B1 and B2 are the quotations given by the opposite party for the piling work by Auger Method and Rotary Method respectively. The opposite party had done the piling work by Auger method 0n 07/01/2016 and 08/01/2016. The piling work was done by Rotary method from 19/01/2016 to 29/01/2016. After completing the piling work opposite party issued Ext A3 Bill on 30/01/2016 to the complainant.
The complainant constructed a double storied building having area of 2900 Square feet on the pile foundation done by the opposite party. While the complainant and family were residing in the house, cracks were developed on several areas of the house. The complainant then conducted the rectification works of the building.
PW1 the complainant had deposed that Piling മുഴുവനായി അവരെ ഏല്പിച്ചതാണ്. Totally അവരുടെ role ആണ് mechanical ആണോ അല്ലയോ എന്നത്. (A) pile point out ചെയ്തിടത്തെല്ലാം piles ചെയ്തതായി ബോദ്ധ്യപ്പെട്ടു.
PW2 the structural engineer Sunil. K. Jose deposed that the Ext.A2 foundation design was prepared by him and the drawings for the piling were separately given. The damage was caused to the house because of differential settlement. “A2 ൽ Piling-നു വേണ്ടിയുള്ള drawings പ്രേത്യേകമായി നൽകിയിട്ടുണ്ട്. Drawing പണിത വീടിനു ക്ഷതം സംഭവിച്ചിരുന്നതായി ശ്രദ്ധിക്കപ്പെട്ടിരുന്നു. അവിടെ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നത് differential settlement ആയിരുന്നത് കൊണ്ട് സംഭവിച്ചത്. Building ന്റെ settlement ൽ difference ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. സ്ഥലത്തു ഇരുത്തം വന്നതുകൊണ്ടാണ് കെട്ടിടം ചെരിഞ്ഞത്. പൈലിങ് വർക്കുകളുടെ default കൊണ്ടാണോ സംഭവിച്ചത് (Q) Foundation ന്റെ failure കൊണ്ടാണ്”. The opinion of PW2 is that the damage to the building was caused due to the failure of the foundation and Piling is the foundation.
The opposite party was examined as DW1 and had admitted of having undertook the piling operation of the proposed building of the complainant at Devalokam, Kottayam as per Ext.B1 and B2 quotations. The piling works were completed on 29/01/17 and had issued Ext.A10 Bill for the said work.
Ext.A6 is an agreement executed on 08/09/2018 by the complainant with TDBD Engineering Works Pvt Limited, Haryana for uplifting the house from the ground level to one feet at the rate of Rs 235.86 per square feet.
Even though the complainant adduced Ext A9 Bill for concrete chipping, Ext A11 series bill for cement and other items, Ext A12 series bill for bricks, Ext A13 bill for steel, Ext A16 series bill for Sanitary fittings, Ext A17 series bill for granite, Ext.A18 bill for building materials, Ext.A19 series bill for paint, and Ext.A20 series bill for pipe and other fittings there is no expert evidence to establish that these materials and works were necessary for the reconstruction work of the house of the complainant.
The complainant had paid Rs.7,03,000/- to TDBD Engineering works vide Ext.A14 series for the lifting of the house. The complainant executed Ext.A8 agreement with/s South India foundations, MDC center, K.K Road Kottayam on 27/09/2018 for pile foundation for the rectification work of house.
Ext.A10 is the bill issued by South India Foundations to the complainant dated 10/10/2018 for an amount of Rs.2,06,500/- being the labour charges for boring, making and placing reinforcement in position and concreting using Mounted Rotary Method for 350mm dia pile, 5 numbers up to a depth of about 16 m up to hard rock.
The complainant had spent Rs.7,03,000/- for lifting of the house, Rs.2,06,500/ for making additional pile foundations. Thus, the complainant spent an amount of Rs.9,09,500/-for rectifying the defects of the house of the complainant.
On the basis of the above discussed findings, it is clear that the piling foundation done by the opposite party for the proposed house of the complainant at Devalokam, Kottayam were defective and as a result cracks were developed on the walls of the house. The complainant and family were forced to shift from their new house on safety reasons. The complainant and family suffered much difficulties. The opposite party is liable to compensate for the sufferings of the complainant and family. It is clear that the opposite party failed to complete the pile foundations to be fit for the construction of a new house on the foundation.
This act on the part of the opposite party is deficiency in their service. Hence point No.1 and 2 are found in favour of the complainant. We allow the complaint and pass the following orders.
- The opposite party is directed to give Rs.9,09,500 /- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
- The opposite party is directed to give Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and sufferings with cost Rs.5,000/-.
The order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. If not complied as directed the amounts will carry 7% interest p.a till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 20th day of January, 2023.
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member sd/-
Sri. Manulal.V.S, President sd/-
Smt.Bindhu.R, Member sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant.
A1 - Soil investigation for the proposed residential building dated 2.11.2015
A1 (a)- Test results issued by Sharp Soil Lab
A1(b)- Recommendations of S & R consultants dated 12.11.2015
A2- Column layout produced by an Autodesk Educational Product
A2 (a)- Plinth beam layout dated 10/12/2015
A2(b)- Plinth beam layout dated 10/12/2015
A2(c)- Plinth beam details dated 10/12/2015
A2(d)- Plinth beam details dated 10/12/2015
A2(e)- Plinth beam details dated 10/12/2015
A2(f)- Junction column details dated 10.12.2015
A2(g) - Pile lay out dated 08/12/2015
A2(h) - Typical pile section dated 08/12/2015.
A3- Bill issued by Central Pile Foundation & Constructions dated 30.01.2016.
A4- Photograph of damaged building
A4(a)- Photograph of damaged building
A4(b)- Photograph of damaged building
A5- Description of work amount issued by TDBD Engg.Works Pvt.Ltd
A6- Agreement dated 08/09/2018.
A7- Description of work details dated 05/09/2018.
A8- Agreement dated 27/09/2018
A9- Bill dated 28.09.2018
A10- Bill dated 10/10/2018
A11- GST invoice No.2178 dated 25.02.2019
A11(a)- GST invoice No.2109 dated 13.02.2019
A11(b)- GST invoice no.1755 dated 28.12.2018
A11(c)- GST invoice no.1595 dated 4.12.2018
A11(d)- GST invoice no.1578 dated 01.12.2018
A11(e)- GST invoice no.1523 dated 24.11.2018
A11(f) - Tax invoice no. K/3834 dated 03.11.2018
A11(g)- GST invoice no. 729 dated 28.09.2018
A12- Quotation of Manakkattu Aggregate Development plot,Poovanthuruthu, dated 28.11.2018
A12(a)- Quotation of Manakkattu Aggregate Poovanthuruthu, dated 09.11.2018
A13- Bill of Kailath Steels, Changanassery dated 07.12.2018
A14- Receipt dated 16.01.2019
A14(a)- Receipt dated 15.01.2019
A14(b)- Receipt dated 28.12.2018
A14(c) – Receipt dated 31.10.2018
A14(d)- Receipt dated 18.10.2018
A15- Quote for maintenance of Kosamattom House dated 29.01.2019
A16- Tax invoice dated 01.05.2019
A16(a)- Tax invoice dated 30.04.2019
A16(b)- Tax invoice dated 04.04.2019
A16(c)- Tax invoice dated 15.02.2019
A16 (d)- Tax invoice dated 24.01.2019
A17- Tax invoice dated 17.04.2019
A17(a)- Bill of Star Granite & Marble dated 07.03.2019
A18- Tax invoice no. KtmR/2124 dated 01.07.2019
A19- Tax invoice dated 23.05.2019
A19(a)- Tax invoice dated 21.05.2019
A19(b)- Tax invoice dated 09.05.2019
A19(c) Tax invoice dated 07.05.2019
A19(d)- Tax invoice dated 03.05.2019
A19(e)- Tax invoice dated 29.04.2019
A19(f)- Tax invoice dated 26.04.2019
A19(g)- Tax invoice dated 25.04.2019
A19(h)- Tax invoice dated 20-04.2019
A19(i)- Tax invoice dated 11.04.2019
A19(j)- Tax invoice dated 06.04.2019
A19(k)- Tax invoice dated 04.04.2019
A19(l)- Tax invoice dated 30.03.2019
A19(m)- Tax invoice dated 30.03.2019
A19(n)- Tax invoice dated 25.03.2019
A20- Tax invoice dated 06.09.2019
A20 (a) Tax invoice dated 03.09.2019
A21- Photograph of building
A21 (a)- Photograph of building
A21(b)- Photograph of building
A21(c)- Photograph of building
A21 (d)- Photograph of building
A21(e) – Photograph of building
A21(f)- Photograph of building
A21(g)- Photograph of building
A21(h)- Photograph of building
A21(i)- Photograph of building
A21(j)- Photograph of building
A22- Notice dated 18.09.2018
A23- Postal acknowledgment receipt
A24- Postal acknowledgment card
Sworn statement from the side of complainant.
PW1- George Thomas, S/o E.V.Thomas, Inchakkattu House, Sindia Enclave, Devalokam, Kottayam.
PW2- Sunil K Jose, S/o K.U.Jose, Kallolichal (H), Malloossary P.O, Kottayam.
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
B1- Quotation dated 12.11.2015
B2- Quotation dated 13.01.2015
Sworn statement from the side of opposite party.
DW1- Bijumon M.A, S/o Abraham, Mullankuzhy, Malakkunnam P.O,Changanassery.
By order
sd/-
Assistant Registrar
