SMT. RAVI SUSHA : PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant for getting an order directing opposite party to pay 4,25,000/- as the compensation for low quality wood used and replacing cost for the carpentry work entrusted to the OP, together with Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation for mental and physical agony and cost of this complaint alleging defective carpentry work and thus having rendered the deficient service by the OP.
The complainant alleged that the complainant is working abroad that he started construction work for a new house, in the year 2012, since he is at abroad on behalf of him the construction work has been managed by his sister as PA holder .On December 2013 the OP approached to the PA holder of the complainant requested for the carpenter work including the supply of the wood for the same . Then the Complainant’s P.A holder entrusted door work of the entire house building, work of the frame of the windows, cupboard in 4 rooms, 4 cots, stair case railing, kitchen cabinets, dining table with 6 chairs to OP. At the time of entrusting the work, the OP has assured and undertakes that he has to do work of two window frames and min doors in front portion of the house in teakwood and remaining windows frame and the remaining door in Irool wood. The entire remaining door and work of cup board, cots, stair case railing, kitchen cabinets etc has to be done in Irool wood. Further submitted that for the work, the P/A holder of complainant had paid total amount of Rs.11,50,000/- to the OP. But when the complainant inspected the house prior to the house warming, it is noticed that the OP has done the carpentry work not in the Irool wood. OP used low quality wood of “Valanchi” for making doors and windows of the house. Thus the OP violated the assurance and undertaking given to the complainant. Complainant further submits that the total market value for Irool wood is Rs.550/per cubic meter. In this account itself the OP received an excess amount of Rs.1,75,000/- from the complainant. For replacing the above furniture at least an amount of Rs.2,75,000/- is required for purchasing wood and other work an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and in total Rs.425000/- is minimum required. The complainant as well as PA holder agrees to settle the matter for an amount of Rs.1,75,000/- and an agreement executed by OP on 9/12/2015 agreed to return the said amount Rs.1,75,000/- to the complainant with 31st March 2016. On 25/4/2016 PA holder send a notice to OP demanding the agreed amount, but in reply the OP send false allegations. Hence this complaint.
In receiving notice, OP has filed his written version and denied the allegations by the complainant. It is stated that he has completed the carpentry work within the stipulated period itself as agreed. A per the terms and condition, the entire carpentry work was fixed for an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- and the complainant has to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to him as dues. He has stated that he had used teak wood and irool woods for the building where as valanchi woods are used for furnitures at the request of the complainant himself. Further submits that up to the house warming, there was no complaint upon the standard of the work as well as the cost of work by the complainant and his people. Only after the demand of balance amount, demanded by the OP the complainant poured the allegations against the former. In short the above complaint is filed only to tackle over the dues of Rs.1,50,000/- towards of the OP by the complainant. Though the OP had filed a complaint before the SHO Valapattanam police station upon the above said assault and other criminal actions by the complainant , no action is taken so far, because of this he made a complaint to the SP of police, Kannur also which is on process. Hence prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
While pendency of this complaint, complainant has taken steps to appoint an expert commissioner to inspect the premises of complainant and to file report. As per the application Mr.Benni V.C, Senior Instructor, Carpentry section, ITI,Kannur, was appointed. He had inspected the house of complainant on 18/2/2017 in the presence of complainant and OP, and filed a detailed report. Complainant and OP filed objection to the expert report.
At the evidence stage, complainant has filed chief affidavit. Examined as PW1 and marked Exts.A1 to A3 and Ext.C1. Two more witness were examined, on the side of complainant. The expert and another person. On the side of OP two witness were examined including OP as DWs 1&2. Marked Exts.B1 to B7.
After that the learned counsel for the complainant argued the matter and the learned counsel of OP filed argument note.
It is an admitted fact that the OP had agreed to render his service for carpentry work of complainant’s newly constructed house. Complainant’s P.A holder entrusted door work of the entire house building, work of the frame of the windows, cupboard in 4 rooms, 4 cots, stair case railing, kitchen cabinets, dining table with 6 chairs to OP. Complainant alleged that at the time of entrusting the work, the OP has assured and undertakes that he has to do work of two window frames and min doors in front portion of the house in teakwood and remaining windows frame and the remaining door in Irool wood. The entire remaining door and work of cup board, cots, stair case railing, kitchen cabinets etc has to be done in Irool wood. Further submitted that for the work, the P/A holder of complainant had paid total amount of Rs.11,50,000/- to the OP. But when the complainant inspected the house prior to the house warming, it is noticed that the OP has done the carpentry work not in the Irool wood. OP used low quality wood of “Valanchi” for making doors and windows of the house. Thus the OP violated the assurance and undertaking given to the complainant. Complainant further alleged that the total market value for Irool wood is Rs.550/per cubic meter. In this account itself the OP received an excess amount of Rs.1,75,000/- from the complainant. For proving the said fact complainant submitted Ext.A1 agreement executed by OP on 9/12/2015 agreed to return the said amount Rs.1,75,000/- to the complainant within 31st March.
On the other hand OP in the version stated that Ext.A1 was executed under force from the side of complainant and their persons. OP denied the deficiency in the carpentry work done by him. According to him as per the terms and condition, the entire carpentry work was fixed for an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- and the complainant has to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to him as dues. He has stated that he had used teak wood and irool woods for the building where as valanchi woods are used for furnitures at the request of the complainant himself. According to him Ext.A1 was executed by complainant and others five persons, compelled him to put his signature in blank stamp-paper.
Though OP raised the above said contentions, he has failed to establish those contentions.
As regards the claim of complainant, we find that each of the item as regards the defective workmanship has been fully justified by the expert commissioner. The expert has given a detailed report, has been examined as a witness on the side of complainant. Though OP has filed serious objection and cross-examined in detail, the observations of expert commissioner in the report could not discard by the OP. It is obvious that expert is a qualified person and he observed each and every point in his report, he has submitted photos also. His opinion is that though the carpentry work done by the OP had a good finishing and good design work, the material of wood used by OP is of low quality, cheap soft wood. It is opined that those type of wood materials are not being used for making furniture work in house because those furniture made with such wood material will become damage within short period. The observations are made by the qualified expert and therefore, there is no reason for us to doubt the opinion of the expert commissioner. Under the circumstances, we hold that the service rendered by the OP has been deficient as a result of negligence in the service of the OP.
Thus there is no doubt that the complainant proved his allegation of defective work by the OP by using low quality cheap wood material like valanchi for making furniture, door, cupboard, cot etc. Expert observed that the work done by the OP were became defective. Hence the complainant is entitled to get relief. It is an admitted fact that the complainant had paid Rs.11,50,000/- to the OP. OP failed to prove that complainant has to give Rs.1,50,000/- to him as balance due amount.
In the result complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant as the compensation for the low quality wood used and the replacing cost for the carpentry work entrusted to the OP. Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony to the complainant due to the deficiency in service of opposite party. Further Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings of this case. Opposite party shall comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Failing which Rs.3,00,000/- + Rs.50,000/- will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. Complainant can execute the order as per provision in Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Exts:
A1-Original agreement
A2-copy of lawyer notice
A3-reply notice
C1- commission report with photos
B1- complaint send to S.P. of Police,Kannur
B2- copy of postal receipt
B3-Acknowledgment card
B4- complaint to SHO Valappattanam by OP
B5-certified copy of complaint to JFCM court Kannur
B6-certified copy of protest complaint order before JFCM court Kannur
B7-invoice bill dtd.10/9/2013 issued by Sree Ambika wood industries
PW1- Kanaka.P.-PA holder of complainant
PW2-Benny.V.C- witness of complainant
PW3-Dileepkumar.K- witness of complainant
DW1- Jayaprakashan- OP
DW2-Raghu-k- witness of OP
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew. Sajeesh K.P
eva /Forwarded by Order/
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
