BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 29 of 2015
Date of Institution : 30.1.2015
Date of Decision : 20.52016
Chamba Ram, aged about 46 years son of Sh.Sanjha Ram, r/o village Vaidwala, tehsil and distt. Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
Gurmeet Singh son of Sh.Lakhdev Singh, r/o village Vaidwala, tehsil and Distt. Sirsa.
...…Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT
SHRI RAJIV MEHTA………..……MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Pankaj Bansal, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party exparte.
ORDER
Case of complainant, in brief, is that the opposite party being a contractor entered into agreement with the complainant on 25.3.2014 for construction of residential house (two rooms) of the complainant at the rate of Rs.100/- per feet including the construction of stair case and Lipai. It was also agreed that Op will construct three Khaskas inside the rooms and would charge half for R.C.Beem and designing and also to construct a floor. At the time of agreement, Rs.5000/- were charged by Op as earnest money and construction work was to be completed within 3 months from the date of agreement. But, during raising construction and making the lintel, Op had not put any support to the same, resultantly, the lintel of rooms become irregular. Besides it, due to wrong level of roof, the water collected on the opposite side instead of flowing into the rain water outlet. The Op while raising construction used extra ordinary construction material i.e. cement, reta, Bajri, Crasher etc. instead of estimated material. By the abovesaid act and conduct, the Op has caused an unnecessary loss of Rs.2,00,000/- and the work is still lying incomplete. The complainant approached Op many times to compensate him the losses and to complete the construction work, but he refused. Hence, the present complaint.
2. Upon notice, as none appeared on behalf of opposite party, therefore, he was proceeded exparte vide order dated 25.3.2015.
3. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Ex.C1- his own supporting affidavit; Ex.C2 to Ex.C6-photographs; Ex.C7-slip dt. 26.3.2014; Ex.C8-affidavit of Malook Singh, co-villager of complainant .
4. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for the complainant.
5. In the present case, the complainant has placed on record a slip Ex.C7 regarding agreement between him and the Op regarding construction of alleged work of house, but the said slip is not reliable because the same do not bear the signatures of any witness. He has placed on record only his self serving affidavit and affidavit of one Malook Singh, co-villager. The affidavit of said Malook Singh cannot be considered as true because he is not the eye witness of said agreement. Apart this, the self serving affidavit of the complainant is also not sufficient to support his case. Moreover, allegedly, the Op constructed the house of the complainant on contract basis. The duty of the Op was only to construct the contract work. The deterioration of the rooms and level of the lintel might be due to some inferior and sub standard material purchased by the complainant, which was used by the Op. Furthermore, the complainant has not examined any expert or technician to prove his stand that the damage to his house was due to fault in construction work of Op.
6. Resultantly, it is very clear that there is no merit in this complaint. Therefore, this complaint is hereby dismissed, but with no order as to costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated: Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
