Kerala

Thiruvananthapuram

CC/350/2021

K Suresh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Italian Pest control Services - Opp.Party(s)

26 Aug 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

 

PRESENT

   SRI.P.V.JAYARAJAN               : PRESIDENT

SMT.PREETHA .G.NAIR           : MEMBER

SRI.VIJU.V.R                           : MEMBER

CC.NO.350/2021 (Filed on: 17/11/2021)

ORDER DATED : 26/08/2022

COMPLAINANT

K.Suresh,

S/o.Krishnan, Mandiram Junction,

Thodiyoor.P.O, Karunagappally,

Kollam, And Now Residing at

D-110, Anuvijaya Township,

Chettikkulam, Radhapuram Taluk,

Tirunalveli District, Tamil Nadu – 627120

 

(By Adv.Sajan Binu.V.J)

VS

OPPOSITE PARTY

M/s.ITALIAN PEST CONTROL SERVICES,

Rep.by its Proprietor,

Devi Apartment, TC No.54/3143, S-2

Kaladi, Karamana.P.O

Thiruvananthapuram- 695 002

(Exparte)

ORDER

SMT.PREETHA.G.NAIR            :MEMBER

1.       The complainant is working at Koodamkulam Nuclear Power Plant, Tamil Nadu. The opposite party engaged in the business of Pest Control Services in Kerala. The complainant constructed a house for his family at Mandiram Junction, Thodiyoor.P.O, Karunagappally, Kollam District where his near relatives live. At the time of starting the building construction, the complainant noted the advertisement in the internet site of the opposite party with its venture for eradicating pest, termite or ant in the newly constructed building. The agent of the opposite party who had explained the matters through phone and had given phone number of their office. He said that their head office is at Thiruvananthapuram. Thereafter, somebody from the head office of the opposite party called the complainant on phone and had noted the address and place. Thereby the complainant agreed with the opposite party for applying “ Anti Termite Treatment” for his new building construction in the year 2016. When the complainant talked to the opposite party through phone from the initial stage, he had assured that there would not be any kind of pest, termite or ant in the said building under construction of its surroundings if their technology is to be applied. By believing the assurance from the opposite party, the complainant agreed for applying termite control services in his building under construction. Thereby, two workmen of the opposite party came to complainant’s property at Karunagappaly, Kollam on 15/12/2016 and had done service of Anti Termite Pest Management. They drilled the basement and had injected some low quality liquid terminator and had tried to convince the complaint that it was German Medicine. The basement as well as the surrounding areas were filled with the said medicine and the work was completed within two hours. The complainant questioned the quality of the medicine at that time but again, the opposite party and its labourers tried to convince the complainant that they will do the needful if anything happen against their assurance. They also argued that they had been using the same medicine to all their works for the last more than five years. Believing the words and upon the assurance received from the opposite party and moreover, there was guarantee for ten years, the complainant did not argue more at that time. Thereafter, the opposite party had guaranteed the work for ten years and the warranty period commencing from 15/12/2016 to 15/12/2026. They had issued a warranty certificate as per work order for your work and assured that there will not be any kind of termite in the building under construction. The opposite party received an amount of Rs.12,000/- for the said work. The workmen said that they came far away from Kollam for which they have no branch office for the opposite party at Kollam. The complainant was informed and later he had seen that the cupboards in the bed room as well as kitchen were spread with termites since January 2020 onwards. It was quite shocking for the complainant. The complainant contacted the opposite party several times through phone but were not given any satisfactory reply. The opposite party simply ignore the assurance and service warranty given to the complainant on 15/12/2016.  The complainant sent Advocate notice to the addresses in the advertisement of opposite party in the internet. The opposite party had replied that they had closed the business. Due to the irresponsible behaviour, unfair trade practice and deficiency of service from the side of the opposite party, the complainant had faced a lot of problems and subjected himself to utter loss and also mental agony. The opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant for such loss suffered by the complainant due to the acts of opposite party is clear case of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint.

2. After accepting the notice the opposite party was absent and opposite party set exparte.

3.       Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Exts.A1 to A7 marked.

Issues to be considered are :

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost.

Issues I & II

4.       We perused relevant documents on record. As per Ext.A2 in the name of complainant the service invoice issued by the opposite party dated 15/12/2016 for an amount of Rs.12,000/-. Ext.A1 is the 10 years service warranty certificate. Ext.A3 is the lawyer notice sent to opposite party. Ext.A4 & Ext.A5 is the postal receipt and acknowledgment card. Ext.A6 is the return of notice of opposite party in two another address. Ext.A7 shows the address of opposite party in the internet The complainant stated that the opposite party had done the work by drilling and inject the medicine on the basement and its surroundings within a half day. Later the complainant had seen that the cupboards in the bedroom and kitchen were spread with termites since January 2020 onwards. Then the complainant contacted the opposite party through phone several times but were not given any reply. The opposite party had given ten years service warranty on 15/12/2016. Moreover the opposite party had stated that they had closed their business and not able to do any work. Thereafter the complainant contacted the opposite party and demanded to return money, but the opposite party abused him. The complainant sent advocate notice to opposite party to the address in the advertisement of them in the internet. The complainant stated that the online add and the business promotion of opposite party is still continuing and thereby deceive many people every now and then.

5.       The opposite party had not produced any evidence to disprove the case of the complainant. On the available evidence the complainant was able to establish that he has sustained loss.

                 In view of the above discussions, we find that the act of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

                In the result, complaint allowed. We direct the opposite party to refund Rs.12,000/- as the cost of work and pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation and pay Rs.2500/- as cost of proceedings failing which the amount except cost carries interest @9% per annum from the date of order till realization.

               A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

               Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 26^th day of August 2022.

 

                                                                                         Sd/-

P.V.JAYARAJAN   : PRESIDENT

 

                                                                                          Sd/-

                                          PREETHA G NAIR: MEMBER

 

                                                                                          Sd/-

                                          VIJU.V.R    : MEMBER

Be/

APPENDIX

CC.NO 350/2021

List of witness for the complainant

PW1                      - K.Suresh

Exhibits for the complainant

Ext.A1                  - Copy of service warranty certificate

Ext.A2                  - Service invoice dated 15/02/2016

Ext.A3                  - Copy of advocate notice dated 09/03/2021

Ext.A4                  - Postal Receipts (2 Nos)

Ext.A5                  - Acknowledgment card (1 No)

Ext.A6                  - Returned Advocate Notices (2 Nos)

Ext.A7                  - Address of the opposite party in the internet (3 nos)

List of witness for the opposite party – NIL

Exhibits for the opposite party       - NIL

Court Exhibits                                   - NIL

 

 

 

                                                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                                                PRESIDENT