FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT
Sri Prabin Chettri Ld. Member
Brief fact of the case as stated by the complainant Shri Amitava Bhattacharyya agreed to repair/ renovation of his house from the O.P. Shri; Debabrato Gupto( CUISINE Interio) as per offer letter given by the O.P. dated 31/01/2017. The complainant paid Rs.20,000/- as an advance to the O.P. to begin the repair/renovation work of the complainant. The O.P. assure the complainant to complete the works within 25 days, so, the complainant paid the contract amount of Rs. 90,000/- in due course of time. But, the O.P. did’nt complete the works within the stipulated time. Complainant on several time requested to the O.P. for completion of the works but O.P. did’not response and hopelessly fail to complete the works as per agreement. The attitude of the O.P.s compel the complainant to lodge a police complaint, but than also O.P. did’nt complete the works as per agreement.
Complainant than himself complete the pending necessary works by paying extra cost to the other. Complainant being harass by the O.P. compel to file this case before the Forum as the O.P. also did’nt response/ or appear before the Consumer Affairs Department for mediation.
Being mentally harass, pain and agony by the O.P., the complainant prays before the Forum for Redressal as per petition of complaint.
On the other hand O.P. appear and files his Written Version before the Forum. The O.P. denies and disputes the allegation of the complainant. The specific stand of the O.P. is that, on being approached by the complainant opposite party agreed for renovation of building of the complainant and finished their work within time, more over on request of the complainant the O.P. done some extra work & spends Rs. 1,86,107 ( One lakh eighty six thousand and one hundred and seven rupees only) for the whole work. That the complainant tills today has paid only Rs. 91,000/-( Rs. 81,000/- main work + Rs. 10,000/- for extra work), and Rs. 95.107 is still due, the opposite party on several times approached the complainant for payment but without any result.
Hence, the averments/prayers are bad, frivolous and the instant complaint is made without any merits and prays for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
Considering the rival pleadings of both the parties, the following points are taken up for consideration.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION :-
1) Whether the case is maintainable or not in this Forum under the law and fact of the case?
2) Whether there is any Deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. as alleged?
3) Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief and to what extent?
DECISION WITH REASONS :-
During argument both the parties submitted before the Forum that they would not adduce any oral evidence. They also submitted before the Forum that Final Order/Judgement be passed on the basis of the petition of complaint along with documents annexed therein supported by affidavit and the Written Version along with documents annexed therein supported by affidavit treating them as their respective evidence on affidavit. Accordingly, those are treated as the respective evidence on affidavit of both the parties.
All points are taken up together for consideration and for the proper adjudication of the case.
Complainant agreed to get his house repaired by the O.P. as per the Quotation given by the O.P. dated 31/01/2017. For which the complainant paid Rs. 20,000/- as an advance to the O.P. The O.P. also started the work, on due course the complainant paid the whole some amount of Rs 80,000/- to the O.P. But, unfortunately the working process of the O.P. is not up to the satisfactory within time frame of 25 days. Almost all the works of Bath Room, Kitchen, Electrical work, Painting and wooden works are incomplete.
On several times complainant requested to the O.P. to complete the works as per the agreement between them as the complainant had paid Rs. 80,000/- to the O.P. in due course of time. But the O.P. did’nt fulfill the contract in due time and also harassed the complainant by threatening, for this the complainant was/is in mental agony, harassment and pain.
Sec 2 (d) “Consumer” means any; person who (ii)3 [hires or avails of] any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other then the person who 3[hires or avails of] the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person 4[but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purpose;]
Here, in this case the complaint hires the service for a consideration from the O.P. hence the complainant is a Consumer and the case is well maintainable in the Forum.
Now, on perusal of the complainant’s petition along with the documents and the Written Version along with the documents of the O.P. we find that, the complainant agreed with the O.P. for renovation/repair the house as per the Quotation given by the O.P. dated 31/01/2017 with a consideration amount of Rs. 91,000/-. But, in due course the O.P. did’nt complete the works as per given time frame after receiving Rs. 80,000/- out of Rs. 91,000/-.
The O.P. admits that on being approached by the complaint O.P. agreed for renovation of building and finished their works within time, but in due course as we find that, after receiving Rs. 80,000/- from the complainant, O.P. unable to complete the same as on hearing stage the O.P. himself admitted that the kitchen counter repairing, Floor repairing and made it 2’00” * 200”floor, tiles are still incomplete, so we find that the complainant’s petition is in somehow at a considerable ground.
Hence, there is some Lacuna in service provided by the O.P. to the complainant.
Furthermore, we are convinced that, there is Deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.
Although the complainant has not fulfilled his whole part of the contract, the O.P. can not deny his responsibility in the matter of payment of compensation. This is more so because payment of Rs. 80,000/- has been accepted by him. The O.P.’s default can not be at par with the default on the part of the complainant.
Now, the Question for Extra-Work or the extra money related with this case matter is not the matter of proper adjudication as this is beyond the contract/ Quotation or offer letter for Renovation of Building provided to the complainant by the O.P.
In the light of our observation made above we have already found that the O.P. is guilty for Deficiency in Service.
Accordingly, the complainant is entitled to get an order along with other reliefs in part as prayed for.
The points are thus decided in favour of the complainant
As a result the case is succeed.
. Hence, it is
O R D E R E D :-
That the complaint case/application no 20/2018 is allowed in part on contest against the O.P. with litigation cost of Rs. 1,000/-
The O.P. is also hereby directed to pay Rs. 5000/- towards compensation for harassment, which we think is proper and justified.
The complainant do get an award of Rs. 20,000/- for the cost of incomplete works.
The O.P. (Cuisine Interio) proprietor Shri; Debabrato Gupto is hereby directed to comply the aforesaid direction and to pay litigation cost, compensation and the cost of incomplete works of (Rs. 1000 + 5000/- + 20,000/-) total Rs. 26,000/- to the complainant by Account Payee Cheque within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the entire amount will bear 8% interest P.A. and the complainant shall be at liberty to realize the entire amount by putting this order into execution in accordance with laws.
Let a copy of this order be supplied free of cost forthwith to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/agents on record by hand under proper acknowledge/sent by speed post in terms of Rule-5(10) of the West Bengal Consumer Protection Rules,1987.
