DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 30th day of September 2009.

 Present : Smt. H. Seena, President

: Smt. Preetha.G. Nair (Member)

: Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K. (Member)

C.C.No.114/2008

P.K. Raveendran

S/o. Late Kesavan Nair

Chemmamthottil

Pothundi (P.O)

Chittur Taluk

Palakkad District

(Adv. T. Saju Abraham) - Complainant

V/s

M. Mahendran

S/o. R. Mayilchamy

Parayil veedu

Chathamangalm Pezhumpara

Chittur Taluk

Palakkad - Opposite Party

O R D E R

By Smt. A.K. Bhanumathi, Member

In short the complaint is as follows.

The complainant owns a 1400 square feet concrete house. As it has some leakage in the roof of the main hall, the opposite party approached the complainant to repair the same. The opposite party made the complainant believe that he has special knowledge in the said work. So the complainant and opposite party entered into an agreement for repairing the roof, constructing a room and bathroom, making a swimming pool using cement and concrete and fitting grill on the compound wall. In total the complainant has to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to the opposite party. The opposite party received a total sum of Rs.97,000/- from the complainant within the period 27/01/2008 to 19/04/2008. Due to the poor workmanship and lack of proper proportion building materials, the quantity of the replastered portion got damaged. When intimated, the opposite party agreed to repair it. Even though opposite party accepted Rs.97,000/- from the complainant he did not care to complete any of the work as agreed.

- 2 -

As per the agreement the work should be completed before 31/07/2008. Due to the careless and irresponsible attitude of the opposite party, the work remains unfinished. The complainant filed a complaint before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alathur. On enquiry, the opposite party agreed his fault and agreed to complete the work. But opposite party did not complete the work as promised. The complainant sent a registered lawyer notice to opposite party, he did not turn up.

According to the complainant the above acts of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service on their part. So the the complainant filed the complaint seeking an order directing the opposite party to refund a sum of Rs.97,000/- the amount already paid to the opposite party together with Rs.50,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony.

The complaint was admitted. Opposite party notice served. Absent. Hence name called and set ex-parte.

Complainant filed affidavit and Exhibit A1 to A2 are marked.

According to the complainant there was an agreement with the opposite party to repair the roof of the main hall and to construct a room, bathroom, swimming pool and to fit the grill on the compound wall. For these an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was fixed. The opposite party repaired the roof of the main hall, (leak proof) but it was not perfect. The complainant, informed this matter to the opposite party. He agreed to repair the same. No other work was done by the opposite party as agreed. Showing all these matters the complainant filed a complaint before Alathur Deputy Superintendent of Police. On enquiry the opposite party agreed his fault and agreed to do the work properly. But nothing was done. So the complainant sent a Registered Lawyer notice but no reply was sent by the opposite party. The act of opposite party amounts to clear deficiency of service and the complaint prays compensation.

The complaint has stated than an agreement was entered into by the complainant and

- 3 -

opposite party for construction works and an amount of Rs.97,000/- was already paid to

the opposite party within the period 27/01/2008 to 19/04/2008. Complainant has not produced any piece of evidence in support of the contentions. Neither agreement nor receipt for payment produced. Further no proof for preferring complaint to Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alathur, as stated by the complainant. Moreover no commission was taken in order to access true facts. Even though notice was ordered for the examination of the witness cited by the complainant who is the contractor who has completed the remaining work of the opposite party, complainant failed to produce him before the forum. Only on the ground that opposite party never appeared before the forum even though notice was served and no contra evidence to that one tendered by the complainant is produced, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled for a nominal amount as compensation.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that an amount of Rs.5,000/- as compensation will meet the ends of justice. In the result, complaint partly allowed.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the complainant is entitled to execute the order as per law.

Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of September, 2009

PRESIDENT (SD)

MEMBER (SD)

MEMBER (SD)

- 4 -

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of Complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of Opposite party

Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

1. Ext. A1 – Registered lawyer notice

2. Ext. A2 – Acknowledgment card

Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party

Nil

Forums Exhibits

Nil

Costs

Allowed.

Forwarded/By Order

Senior Superintendent