Delhi

East Delhi

CC/948/2014

MAHENDER - Complainant(s)

Versus

MO.SHSHROZ - Opp.Party(s)

15 May 2015

ORDER

      DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

                    CONVIENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

 

CASE NO-948/14

In the matter of:

Sh. MAHENDER KUMAR

S/O LATE Sh. BAJRANGI LAL,

R/O B-30/2 GALI No.5, ARJUN MOHALLA, MAUJPUR

DELHI-110053

 

Complainant

 

Vs

 

MOHD. SHAHROZ

SOLE PROPRIETOR M/S. M.S. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

30/3-C, STREET NO.2, JAMALU KA BAGH, MAUJPUR,

DELHI-110053

 

Opposite Party

 

                                                                                 DATE OF ADMISSION-13/10/2014

                                                                                DATE OF ORDER         -18/09/2015

 

SH. N. A. ZAIDI, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed with the allegation that the complainant was desirous of getting a house constructed on his plot admeasuring 150 sq. yards bearing No.B-30/2, Gali No.5, Arjun Mohalla, Maujpur, Delhi. He engaged the services of the Respondent for a consideration of Rs.15 lakhs through agreement dated 14/11/2012. The Respondent was to render services of construction as per specification, as per schedule mentioned in the agreement and possession post construction was to be delivered to the complainant on 10/06/2013, Rs.14 lakhs were paid to the Respondent. On 10/06/2013, when he inspected the site he found the work was incomplete and the construction work was of inferior quality. The legal notice was sent on 13/07/2013 which was served upon the OP. Respondent replied the same on 05/08/2013 with the intervention of respectable persons of locality Respondent agree to complete the work and started the work in the month of October. He carried out the construction of very inferior quality and left the defect mentioned in Para 6 of the complaint. The complainant has to over stay in the rented accommodation and has to bear the extra rentals. The complainant got the report from a Govt. approved Engineer Sh. Ram Singh with respect to defects and the approx. expenditure to be incurred on the rectification/repair of defects. A sum of Rs.4,12,000/- has been assessed by the Engineer Ram Singh. The Respondent is liable to pay this amount. The complainant has claimed the amount of Rs.4,12000/- towards the cost of removal of the defects, rent for the period from 10/06/2013 till the date of completion of work i.e. 15/01/2014 @ of Rs.8,000/month totaling Rs.56,000/- and Rs.50,000/- towards the cost of raw material, and Rs.2 lakhs for compensation and cost of litigation.

            Notice was served upon the OP through speed post, no written statement filed. Case proceeded ex_parte. Affidavit of Sh. Mahinder kumar in support of complaint has been filed. The report of Engineer Ram kumar, copy of the notice, photograph showing the defects in construction, the agreement between the parties are part of evidence.

            We have heard the complainant and perused the record.

            The agreement was executed on 09/11/2012 and as per the agreement Respondent agreed to built the house in question for total consideration of Rs.15 lakhs and the work was to be completed as per this agreement as stated in the complaint by 10/06/2013 although this date has not been mentioned in the agreement but this has been stated on oath by the complainant and is uncontroverted on record. The complainant has also stated on oath that he made the payment of Rs.14 lakh to the Respondent as per Annexure C-2. This has been acknowledged by the OP that he has received payment of Rs.14 lakh on various date, Annexure C-2 bears the signature of the OP. The complainant alleges that the construction was not done as per the specification in the agreement and he has filed photographs to show poor quality of construction. He has also filed on record the report of Engineer Sh. Ram Singh, who is a registered Govt. approved architect and planner. He has noted the defect and the cost required for removing the defect i.e. is Rs.4,12,000/-. This report is also uncontroverted on record. The complainant has also verified on oath that he has to pay extra rental but he has not filed any receipt on record regarding the payment made towards the rent of the house in which he was residing in the course of construction. The agreement between the parties does not provide any information that on account of delay in carried out the construction. Respondent shall be under obligation to pay the rent to the complainant. In these circumstances the prayer for rent cannot be allowed since the Photographs of defects in construction and the report of approved architect is unchallenged. It is to be accepted that for removal of defects will require sum of Rs.4,12000/-, which the Respondent is under obligation to pay to the complainant, If the defect as noted in the report of the Engineer Sh Ram kumar are not removed by the Respondent.

             We allow this complaint we direct the respondent to remove all the defects as noted in the report of Engineer sh. Ram Kumar within a period of One month from the date of the delivery of this judgment, if it is not carried out then the complainant shall be entitled to recover the total amount of Rs.4,12000/- from the OP for carrying out the repair at its own.

            The Respondent is further directed to pay to the complainant the sum of Rs.1 lakh as compensation for harassment, mental pain and agony which shall also include the cost of material and legal cost of these proceedings. If this amount not paid within the period of 45 days from the date of the delivery of the judgment, the complainant shall be entitled for 9% interest over the entire amount.

Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties.

 

SUBHASH GUPTA                          POONAM MALHOTRA                       N.A.ZAIDI

     (MEMBER)                                              (MEMBER)                              (PRESIDENT)