D.O.F. 04.01.2013
D.O.O. 17.12.2013
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR
Present: Sri. K.Gopalan : President
Smt. Sona Jayaraman K. : Member
Sri. Babu Sebastian : Member
Dated this the 17th day of December, 2013.
C.C.No.4/2013
Saji Kidarathil,
Thimiri Amsom,
Thadikkadav Desom,
Kuttipuzha, P.O. Kottayad,
Taliparamba Taluk : Complainant
Kannur – 670 571
Jino Joseph,
Kavalakkatt House,
Vellad Amson Desom, : Opposite Party
Pallikkavala, Via Karuvanchal,
Vellad P.O., Taliparamba Taluk
Kannur – 670 571
O R D E R
Smt. Sona Jayaraman K. Member
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection
Act for an order directing the opposite party to refund `15,000 along with `2,07,125 towards compensation.
The case of the complainant in brief is as follows :
The opposite party is a building construction contractor. The complainant contacted the opposite party for doing the construction work of his house. An agreement was executed between the parties regarding the terms and conditions. Opposite party has collected an amount of `2,15,000, but he has not completed the work within time. Although the opposite party is liable to carry out the work of the house, he has left the work incomplete without even doing the entire groundfloor work. According to the complainant the opposite party has done work only for `2,00,000 and he has collected `15,000 in excess. Moreover the material charges and labour change considerably increased at that time and this has caused heavy loss to the complainant. The complainant has issued a lawyer notice to the opposite party claiming the damages. But evading that notice the opposite party issued another notice claiming the balance amount of the work done by him. For that notice the complainant issued a reply stating true facts. So this complaint is filed to direct the opposite party to return balance amount `15,000 which was collected in excess and `1,07,125 being the price difference of labour charges and `1,00,000 as compensation towards mental agony and pain.
Although notice was issued to opposite party he has not received the same and it was returned with an endorsement “Returned”. So opposite party called absent and set ex-parte.
The main point to be decided is whether there was any deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party. If yes, what is the remedy?
The evidence of the complainant consists of the chief examination of PW1 to PW3 and Ext.A1 to A3 and Ext.C1. PW1 is the complainant, Pw2 is his friend and PW3 is his relative.
The complainant has filed chief affidavit in tune with his pleadings. The complainant and opposite party has entered into an agreement which is marked as Ext.A1. Apart from the oral evidence adduced by the complainant, Ext.A1 agreement also shows that complainant and opposite party entered into agreement and opposite party agreed to do the construction work of complainant’s house. As the opposite party has left without completing the construction work the complainant has taken out Expert Commission and the Ext.C1 report shows that the opposite party has not completed the ground floor work and an amount of `23110 is required to complete that work. Admittedly the complainant has given an amount of `2,15,000 to the opposite party. As per the statement of complainant the opposite party has received `15,000 in excess to the work done by him. Ext.A2 lawyer notice is sent by the opposite party demanding an additional amount of `70000 towards the work done by him. For that complainant sent a detailed reply which is marked as Ext.A3. In that notice the complainant states that he had earlier sent a notice to the opposite party rescinding the contract and claiming damages. But that notice is not seen produced before this Forum. Anyhow there was no contra evidence to dispute the same. Moreover the opposite party has not taken any effort to appear before this Forum and to prove his contentions. So we are of the opinion that there was deficiency in service from the part of opposite party. So he is liable to compensate the complainant.
As per the statement of complainant the opposite party has received an amount of `2,15,000 from him towards his work and the opposite party has done works for only `2,00,000. So `15,000 is received in excess by the opposite party against the terms and conditions of Ext.A1 agreement. That is stated in Ext.A3 notice also. So the opposite party is liable to return the excess amount of `15,000. Ext.C1 commission report shows that the cost of the remaining work. But as it has become clear that opposite party has done work for only `2,00,000 there is no need to enquire into the cost of remaining work. According to the Expert Commissioner an additional amount of `9,000 is necessary for repairing the defects in the work done by opposite party. So the opposite party is liable to give `9,000 to the complainant. As per the evidence adduced by PW1 to PW3 the labour charge and cost of building materials increased and the delay in the work done by the opposite party incurred heavy loss to the complainant. So on that account the complainant is entitled to get an amount of `10,000 as compensation. Moreover admittedly the act of the opposite party caused mental agony and hardships to the complainant. So the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant and he liable to give `5000 towards compensation for the mental agony sustained by the complainant. The opposite party is also liable to give `2500 as cost of the proceedings, which includes the batta given to Expert Commissioner.
In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to return back `15000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) and to pay `9000 (Rupees Nine Thousand only) for the repair work and `15000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as compensation along with litigation cost of `2500 (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) to complainant within one month of receipt of this order. Failing which the opposite party is liable to pay interest @9% from the date of receipt of this order till the realization of the amount. The complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.
Dated this the 17th day of December, 2013.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
President Member Member
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant
A1. Agreement.
A2. Notice sent by OP dated 24.12.2012.
A3. Copy of lawyer notice sent by Complainant.
Exhibits for the opposite party
Nil
Exhibits for the Court
C1. Commission Report
Witness examined for the complainant
PW1. Complainant
PW2. Jose
PW3. Shaju
Witness examined for opposite party
Nil
/forwarded by order/
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
