Delhi

East Delhi

CC/24/2014

RAJESH - Complainant(s)

Versus

FIERRO IDEAS - Opp.Party(s)

24 Nov 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 24/14

 

Shri Rajesh Shiromani

R/o 68, Savita Vihar

Delhi – 110 095                                                                              ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

Neelima Maheshwari

Prop. Fierro Ideas

Off: A-280, Okhla Industrial Area

Phase – I, New Delhi – 110 020                                                                ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 21.01.2014

Judgment Reserved on: 24.11.2016

Judgment Passed on: 19.12.2016

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

JUDGEMENT

The present complaint pertains to allegations of deficiency in services by the complainant Shri Rajesh Shiromani against Neelima Maheshwari, Prop. Fierro Ideas (OP) praying for directions to OP to complete the work as per agreement, Rs. 70,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

2.        Facts in brief are on 04.06.2012, the complainant and OP entered into agreement to install gate, grills and miscellaneous work at complainant’s home.  The said work was to be completed within 6 months for which the complainant paid Rs. 1,68,576/- in total.  A receipt dated 20.05.2013 was issued for the same.  However, OP failed to complete the work in the fixed time frame due to which complainant was constrained to postpone inauguration of his house.  Despite mail dated 10.05.2013, OP had failed to complete the work.  Feeling aggrieved the complainant has invoked the jurisdiction of this forum,.  Photograph of the gate, letter dated 29^th September, delivery schedule, quotation, receipt of Rs. 50,000/-, agreement dated 04.06.2012, account maintained by OP of the complainant, one bill of Rs. 15,076/-, letter dated 17.10.2012 and mails exchanged between the complainant and OP are annexed with the complaint.

3.        Notice of the complaint was served on OP, who did not put appearance.  Thus, vide order dated 24.04.2014, they were proceeded ex-parte.  Thereafter, the complainant was directed to file ex-parte evidence, which was not filed despite several opportunities.

 

4.        The complainant even failed to comply with the directions for filing any document, executed by OP, on record to show that the work pertaining to installation of gate was pending.

5.        As the complainant has failed to file any evidence by way of affidavit or any other document to substantiate his averments in the complaint, the contents of the complaint cannot be said to be proved.  Hence, the present complaint is dismissed without orders to cost.   

Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member    

     

      (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President