DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No.434/2014
Smt. Sunita Sharma
W/o Sh. R. C. Sharma
R/o 308, Hill view Apartments,
1055/1, Ward No.7, Mehrauli,
New Delhi-110030 ….Complainant
Versus
Sh. Manoj Kumar Yadav
S/o Sh. S. B. Yadav
H.No. B-121, Chatarpur Enclave,
Phase-II, New Delhi-110074
Also at:
585, D-27, Chattarpur Hills,
New Delhi-110074 ….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 18.11.2014 Date of Order : 10.10.2018
Coram:
Sh. R.S. Bagri, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER
Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant entered into a collaboration agreement with the OP on 18.02.13 in the presence of mediator Sh. Pradeep Kumar, who had signed the agreement as witness No.1 and Sh. R. C. Sharma had signed as witness No.2. According to the collaboration agreement for the construction work at A-6, Mahavir Campus, Khasra No. 134, Land measuring 100 yds. ( size 15 X 64), Rajpur Khurd Extn., South Mahavir Campus, Pkt-
A, Revenue State of Hauz Khas, New Delhi. It is stated that the OP had not completed the construction in time according to the collaboration agreement i.e. work has to competed within 10 months. The following deficiencies in the work as per the collaboration agreement has been made by the OP in the construction work:-
- The water pipes were not ISI mark as.
- Fire sheets are not fixed on the main gate.
- Plain glass were fixed instead of antilog glasses.
- Granite in kitchen.
- Electrical switches are not ISI mark (Anker/Hey lex).
- Steel drawer in kitchen.
- POP has not been done.
- Grills (MS) in windows/ventilators.
- Gate valve not provided out side the flat.
- Water pipe line are not separated.
- No provision for slip A/C.
- No provision for invertor.
- White washing incomplete
- Plaster on back side wall
- Earthing/Payment of scrap sold by him.
- Uneven floors levels in room and especially in bathrooms.
- Different colored titles in bath room at ground floor
- Bend in door/windows/almirah and gap in fitting
- Seepage and leakage on all the floors rectified by the owner at her cost.
- Poor quality of sanitary items.
It is submitted that other deficiencies were also observed and shown to the OP which the OP has failed to complete even after complaint giving in writing to the OP by the mediator Sh. Pradeep Kr. Singh on 28.03.14. As the OP had not completed the work in time and have not listen to the complaints the complainant had got the work done by own expenditure and she has to spend considerable amount, which has to be borne by the OP as per the agreement. It is submitted that the OP not providing the proper services for which the collaboration agreement was executed which has caused harassment, mental agony for no fault of the complainant. The complainant has prayed that the OP be directed to pay Rs.4 lacs as the damage besides Rs.94791/- be refunded which was charged by the OP and litigation charges be awarded to the complainant.
OP has been proceeded vide order dated 30.10.2015.
Complainant has filed exparte evidence and written arguments.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the complainant and have also gone through the file very carefully.
OP has the knowledge about the filing of the complaint but did not chose to contest it.
The complainant has filed a collaboration agreement as Ex. CW-1/1. The complainant sent a letter dated 11.04.14 to the OP as Ex. CW-1/2. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 17.07.2014 as Ex. CW-1/4. The complainant filed a complaint dated 09.07.14 with the SHO P.S. Mehrauli Ex. CW-1/A. The complainant again sent a letter dated 21.07.2017 to the SHO P.S. Mehrauli. We mark it as Annexure-B for the purposes of identification. The complainant has filed the electricity bills dated 09.05.14 and 04.02.14. We mark them as Annexure-C & Annexure-D for the purposes of identification. The complainant filed the photographs as Ex. CW-1/13. The complainant filed the document signed by the OP and two witnesses namely Sh. Pradeep Kr. Singh and Sh. R. C. Sharma wherein the OP has stated which runs as
“ I Manoj Kumar son of Shri Jaagbali Singh do hereby declare that the electricity meter No.24144132 CA No. 102216048 CRN No.2520176146 which was in the room and used by the tenant of Smt. Sunita Sharma on this plot and which is demolished by me for construct of flats is under my custody/possession and the electricity from this meter is used/consumed by me for my works.
That I hereby held myself responsible and accountable for any problem, fault, for meter status or misuse and I will pay all the penalties and charges imposed by BSES or any other authority/authorities for any fault, misuse, meter status etc. I am very much known to the fact that this can be huge amount of penalty and myself is overall responsible/accountable and I will will not ask for any type of excuses and will pay the amount on the spot to the concerned authority i.e. BSES or to Smt. Sunita Sharma. Smt. Sunita Sharma is not concerned in any respect /manner now as far as this meter status and penalty etc. are concerned. I hereby certify that Manoj Kumar and Manoj Kumar Yadav is one and the same person.”
Averments made in the complaint and evidence led by the complainant have remained uncontroverted and unchallenged. Hence, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.
It is clear from the documents filed by the complainant that the collaboration agreement was signed between the complainant and the OP on 18.02.2013. The complainant sent letters to the OP regarding deficiency in the construction work and filed complaint before SHO P.S. Mehrauli for executing the collaboration agreement. The OP dated nil as Ex. CW-1/9 has stated that as “he is responsible in accountable for any problem, fault, for meter status or misused and he will pay the all the penalties and charges imposed by the BSES or any other authority/authorities for any fault/misuse, meter status etc. and he knows that this can be huge amount of penalty and he is overall responsible/accountable and he will not asked for any type of excuse and will pay the amount on spot to the concerned authority i.e. BSES or to the complainant. The complainant is not concerned in any respect or manner now as far as the above meter status and penalty etc. are concerned.”
In view of the above the OP has accepted that he will make all the payments to the BSES in respect of above meter. The OP had not remove the deficiency as per the collaboration agreement executed between the parties and the complainant had spent Rs.94,791/- for removing the defects. The complainant has not filed the papers regarding that she had spent an amount of Rs.94,791/- towards removing the deficiency in construction work.
The OP has not removed the defects as per collaboration agreement and also mentioned in the complaint amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
We allow the complaint, and direct the OP to pay Rs.1 lakh in lumpsum to the complainant towards compensation for causing harassment and mental agony to the complainant including litigation charges within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which the OP shall pay interest @ 7% per annum on the above said amount of Rs.1 lakh from the date of filing of the complaint till realization.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter files be consigned to record room.
Announced on 10.10.18.
