Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/31/2021

Michael Jery Christ rajan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Deejos Interiors Private Limited Rep by its Director - Opp.Party(s)

Vikram

14 Jun 2022

ORDER

                                                                     Complaint presented on :09.12.2020

                                                                Date of disposal            :14.06.2022

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

                PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                          :PRESIDENT

                                      TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN, M.E.,                         : MEMBER-I

                              THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,   :MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.31/2021

 

DATED TUESDAY THE 14^th    DAY OF JUNE 2022

                                

Micheal Jeny Christ Rajan K

Son of  Mr.Kuzhandhai Samy,

No.302, 4^th floor, Trisquare Kristal,

Ponni Colony Main Road,

Anna Nagar West,

Chennai-600 040.

Email id: mj@wedengage.

 

                                                                                               …..Complainant

 ..Vs..

M/s. Deejos Interiors Private Limited,

Represented by its Director,

Mr.Dennis Ebenezar,

NO.1, 1^st floor, CLC works Road,

Chormpet, Chennai-600 044.

Email id: crm@deejos.co.in.

.....Opposite Party

Counsel for Complainant                   : M/s.Vikram U.Jain and others

 

Counsel for  opposite party                 : Ex-Parte

 

 

 

ORDER

 

THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,   :MEMBER-II:

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs) to the complainant towards damages for physical and mental stress, trauma and agony suffered by the complainant due to defective and incomplete execution of work of interiors done by the opposite party and refund a sum of Rs.24,50,875/- paid by the complainant to the opposite party towards charges for the execution of the interior work to be done by the opposite party and interest at the rate of 24% p.a.on Rs.24,50,875/- from 08.11.2019 till realization and to reimburse such amount that will be incurred by the complainant for refurbishment of the house and also to repair all the defects that have occurred due to faulty interior work done by the opposite party.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complaint is preferred on account of the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the opposite party in failing to do the interiors of the complainants residential flat according to the specifications agreed by them. The complainant stated that his mother Mrs.Selvi is sole and absolute owner of all that piece and parcel residential flat bearing Flat No.4, 4^th floor, in apartment called ‘TRISQUARE KRYSTAL’ at anna nagar chennai. The complainant stated that the opposite party had approached on 28.10.2019 and had claimed that they were pioneers in interior designs and that they execute complete luxury interiors and exteriors within a specified budget. The complainant stated that at the insistence and declaration of the opposite party he and his father Mr.Kuzhandhai samy had entrusted them to do complete interior services for his flat which includes modular  kitchen, chimney, hob, false ceiling and lightings, ceiling speakers and chandeliers, wardrobes and loft covering, dressing and crockery unit, cot mattress, pillow and bedspread, floor mats and beside mats, designer sofa and centre table, dinning table with chair, pooja unit, tv unit, bath accessories and storage, clocks and framed mirror, wallpaper, painting, wall hangings, abstract painting, carpets, curtains, blinds, artificial plants, designer vases, study table and shoe rack, fan, exhaust fan, curtain roads with brackets and with the following specifications a. Ply wood:crownply (BWR and MR Grades), b. Laminates: Greenlam (Matte, Glossy, Texture finishes are available), c. Hinges, channels, locks_Hettich, d.False ceiling: Saint Gobain-Gyproc, e. Mirrors:Saint Gobain. The complainant stated that the opposite party had issued quotation that amount of Rs.24,50,875/- dated:08.11.2019. The complainant had made the pament of Rs.2,50,000/- on 08.11.2019, Rs.10,00,000/- on 15.11.2019 and Rs.12,00,000/- on 04.12.2019.  The complainant further stated that the opposite part’s workforce never used to keep up the schedule and were always very irregular in their work timings resulting in undue delay in the completion of the project. It would not be out of place mention here that the materials used were not according to the specifications which were confirmed by the opposite party.The complainant stated that inspite of repeated mails and going to the office of the opposite party on various occasions and also contacted them through customer care number the opposite party had remained indifferent and unresponsive. The complainant stated that due to the poor workmanship and bad quality of materials used, the said flat is totally shabby looking with water leakages and run down interiors. The complainant stated that due to the flawed and faulty interiors the flat has become totally uninhabitable. The complainant stated that he had sent a legal notice dated 17.03.2022 narrating the aforesaid facts but the opposite party had refused to receive the same and the said notice has been returned with postal endorsement  ‘returned to sender. The complainant stated that he is put to physical and mental stress and mental agony and financial loss by the opposite party.  The complainant stated that he has done expenses of Rs.1,75,000/- for replacing sofa, furniture etc., on which were defective products and rectifying the faults.  The complaint stated that the attitude of the opposite party is totally condemnable and deplorable.

2. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part opposite parties as alleged in the complaint. ?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed in the complaint.     If, so to what extent?

The complainant filed proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to A13were marked on his side. 

3. POINT NO :1

          The Deejos Interiors Private Limited which is shown as opposite party in this case, who has promised in the quoatation given by it for a luxury interior designing of the complainants house at 302, 4^th floor,Trisquare Kristal, Ponni colony main road, Anna nagar west, chennai-40, quoting a  price of Rs.26,32,500/- and offered at price of Rs.24,50,875/- after discount.  Ex.A5,A6 and A7 stand as proof of payment of Rs.2,50,000/- on 08.11.2019, Rs.10,00,000/- on 15.11.2019 and Rs.12,00,000/- on 04.12.2019 made by the complainant through debit card, cash and online respectively.  Ex.A3 and A4  reflects the payment made to the opposite party by the complainants father and complainant’s mother under Ex.A1 father has executed a power of attorney authorizing the complainant herein to file complaint on behalf of him. BY believing the version of the opposite party that they will execute the interior work neatly within specified time. The complainant agreed for the interior service to be done by the opposite party for his flat which includes modular kitchen, chimney, false ceiling, TV unit, etc., as stated in para 6 of the complaint. The opposite party agreed to do interior work by using certain standard materials. According to the complainant the work was irregular resulting in undue delay in completion of work and further substandard materials were used thereby reseuting in shabby execution of interior work.

          4. It is alleged that the complainant has informed to the opposite party through a E-mail as per Ex.A8 and A9 and stated that the work was unsatisfactory, but the opposite party failed to execute the defects in the work inspite of request by Emails.  It is found from the Email send by the opposite party that the opposite party has admitted the defects and agreed to rectify the same within a short time but, contrary to the same the opposite party failed to rectify the defects. It is further found that the opposite party remained Ex-parte and even for the legal notice there was no reply from the opposite party

          5. The defects mentioned in the complaint by the complainant has not been rectified by the opposite party as reflected in Ex.A12.  As per the terms and conditions of the quotation given by the opposite party it has promised various warranties and free maintenance.  But the same was not honoured by the opposite party.  The photographs filed by the complainant which were marked as Ex.A12 clearly proves that there is various defects in the execution of interior work by the opposite party. It is found from Ex.A13 that one of  the TV unit fixed by the opposite party also fell down a few day before 10.12.2021which is subsequent to filing of the complaint. Though the complainant has paid entire agreed amount it is found from the documents filed by the complainant that the opposite party used substandard materials and interior work was not executed as properly as agreed by the opposite party which amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Though the complainant alleged that he has spend a Rs. 1,75,000/- for replacing sofa and furniture and for rectification there is no documentary proof for the same. But at any event it is found that the opposite party has not completed the interior work as agreed and thereby committed by deficiency in service and Point No. 1 is answered accordingly.

6. Point No. 2:-

          Based on findings given in Point No.1 since the opposite party has committed deficiency in service by which the complainant was put to  mental agony and loss due to incomplete execution of interior work and hence the opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the complainant towards the damages for incomplete execution of work and for mental agony and to pay a cost of Rs.5000/-.point No.2 is  answered accordingly.

In  the result the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the complainant towards deficiency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the complaint. The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 2 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest from the date of this order to till the date of payment.

          Dictated  by the President to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 14^th day of  June 2022.

 

MEMBER – I                MEMBER – II                                 PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

 

Ex.A1	09.11.2020	Power of attorney give by the Mr.Kuxhandhai samy to the complainant
Ex.A2	08.11.2019	Quote given by the opposite party
Ex.A3	01.11.2019 to 31.12.2019	Bank statement of complainant father showing proof of payment to opposite pary
Ex.A4	01.11.2019 to 31.12.2019	Bank statement of complainant father showing proof of payment to opposite pary
Ex.A5	09.11.2019	Receipt issued by opposite party for payment of Rs.2,50,000/-
Ex.A6	16.11.2019	Receipt issued by opposite party for payment of Rs.12,00,000/-
Ex.A7	04.12.2019	Receipt issued by opposite party for payment of Rs.10,00,000/-
Ex.A8	12.02.2020	Email between complainant and opposite party
Ex.A9	27.02.2020	Email between complainant and opposite party
Ex.A10	17.03.2020	Legal notice by complainant to the opposite party with postal receipt
Ex.A11		Return cover of legal notice refused by the opposite party
Ex.A12		Photographs
Ex.A13		Email between complainant and opposite party

 

 

 

MEMBER – I                MEMBER – II                                 PRESIDENT