Order dictated by:

Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member.

1.       The complainants have  brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that they having hired the services of Opposite Party falls within the definition of a consumer as defined under the amended Consumer Protection Act, therefore, the complainants are competent to file the present complaint and to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum. It is alleged that the complainant have purchased one plot measuring 123.61 square yards bearing No.A-61, situated at Dutta Enclave Near Mahakali Temple, Majitha Road, Amritsar from previous owners vide sale deed dated 12.3.2015. Opposite Party is a contractor by profession and the complainants approached the Opposite Party for the construction of their house/ building at plot No. A-61 in question. All the terms and conditions were entered into agreement dated 17.12.2015 which were binding upon both the parties to the present complaint. The grievance of the complainants was that the Opposite Party violated almost all the terms and conditions which were incorporated in the agreement dated 17.12.2015. Vide this agreement, the Opposite Party was supposed to complete all the works in the said house/ building by 31.5.2016. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the monty was to be laid at 8 feet height, but the Opposite Party has made the same at 10 feet. The roof of the first floor was to be laid at 11 feet but the Opposite Party without the consent of the complainants got  laid the lintel of first floor at 12 feet. Moreover, the DPC was to be paid at 2’ as per the agreement and as per the terms and conditions of the settlement between the parties to present complaint, however to the utter surprise of the complainants, the Opposite Party without the consent and permission of the complainants  got laid at 1;. Due to this negligent action on the part of the Opposite Party, in order to avoid the wet problem, the cost of treatment will be expended to Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- approximately.  In this way, the Opposite Party used more material than what was actually required causing financial loss to the complainants. It is pertinent to mention over here that the Opposite Party has already taken/ charged a sum of Rs.3,42,608/- from the complainants for the construction of their house/ building, but he has not completed the construction work as per the stipulated date mentioned in the agreement dated 17.12.2015. The Opposite Party has issued receipts in favour of the complainants admitting this  fact  regarding the receipt of Rs.3,42,608/- in installments. Furthermore, as per the terms and conditions of the agreement  the rate of the ground floor was settled as Rs.125 per square feet and first floor was Rs.135/- per square feet and rate for construction of monty on the second floor was settled for Rs.140/- per square feet. But the Opposite Party has charged more money from the complainants in comparision to the work done by him.  Thereafter on 4.6.2016, when the last payment was actually made to the Opposite Party by the complainants, the Opposite Party has stopped construction work in the house and has not completed the construction work undertaken by him as per the requirement and as per the agreement dated 17.12.2015 without any genuine reasons.  It is pertinent to mention over here that the plaster on one side is yet to be  done by the Opposite Party. Moreover, slabs in the kitchen are yet to be constructed. The Opposite Party has not constructed the front boundary wall in the premises. The fitting of gate is yet to be done by the Opposite Party. Not only this, the Opposite Party has not done the work of covering of sanitary  pipes and electricity pipes till date.  The Opposite Party has not fitted the tiles in the premises. The plaster on the outer walls is yet to be done by the Opposite Party. Lastly as per the agreement dated 17.12.2015, the Opposite Party was supposed to finish the entire construction work by 31.5.2016, but the Opposite Party has not completed even half of agreement which he was supposed to finish. Moreover, the complainants used to clear the dues of Opposite Party every weekend, but inspite of fact that the Opposite Party has received more money than what he has done/ completed the construction work, still he has stopped the construction work, meaning thereby that Opposite Party has  already received a payment of Rs.3,42,608/- but he has done the construction work worth about Rs.2,42,000/- i.e. there is a huge difference between the payment received by the Opposite Party and construction work done by him. The complainants had requested the Opposite Party on numerous occasions to complete the construction work as per the terms and conditions of the agreement in question and not to harass them, but the Opposite Party has refused to listen  to the complainants and hence the necessity of filing the present complaint has arisen. The  complainants have prayed for the following reliefs  through the instant complaint.

a)       Opposite Parties be directed to discontinue the deficiency in service and moreover the op may further be directed to complete the construction work as per the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 17.12.2015.

b)      Opposite Party may further be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the complainants for causing mental tension, agony and harassment to them at the hands of the Opposite Party.

c)       The cost of the litigation may also be awarded in favour of the complainants and against the Opposite Party.

d)      Any other relief to which the complainants may be found entitled to, may kindly be awarded to them in the interest of justice, eqity and fair play.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, inspite of due service, none put in appearance on behalf of Opposite Party and as such, Opposite Party was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 16.9.2016 of this Forum. Howeer, at the stage of arguments i.e. on Ms.Harpreet Kaur Grover, Advocate appeared on 28.11.2016.

3.       In  their bid  to prove the case, complainants tendered  affidavit of complainant No.1 Ex.C1, copy of sale deed Ex.C2, copy of agreement Ex.C3, copy of detail Ex.C4, copies of receipts Ex.C5 to Ex.C20, copy of rough detail Ex.C21 and Ex.C22, copies of photographs Ex.C23 to Ex.C25 and closed the exparte evidence.

4.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant as well as ld.counsel for Opposite Party and also gone through the written submissions filed by the complainant and  have carefully gone through the evidence on record.

5.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant have purchased one plot measuring 123.61 square yards bearing No.A-61, situated at Dutta Enclave Near Mahakali Temple, Majitha Road, Amritsar from previous owners vide sale deed dated 12.3.2015, copy of sale deed accounts for Ex.C2. Opposite Party is a contractor by profession and the complainants approached the Opposite Party for the construction of their house/ building at plot No. A-61 in question. All the terms and conditions were entered into agreement dated 17.12.2015 which were binding upon both the parties to the present complaint, copy of terms and conditions of the agreement dated 17.12.2015 is Ex.C3 on record. The grievance of the complainants was that the Opposite Party violated almost all the terms and conditions which were incorporated in the agreement dated 17.12.2015. Vide this agreement, the Opposite Party was supposed to complete all the works in the said house/ building by 31.5.2016. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, the monty was to be laid at 8 feet height, but the Opposite Party has made the same at 10 feet. The roof of the first floor was to be laid at 11 feet but the Opposite Party without the consent of the complainants got  laid the lintel of first floor at 12 feet. Moreover, the DPC was to be paid at 2’ as per the agreement and as per the terms and conditions of the settlement between the parties to present complaint, however to the utter surprise of the complainants, the Opposite Party without the consent and permission of the complainants  got laid at 1’. Due to this negligent action on the part of the Opposite Party, in order to avoid the wet problem, the cost of treatment will be expanded to Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- approximately.  In this way, the Opposite Party used more material than what was actually required causing financial loss to the complainants. It is pertinent to mention over here that the Opposite Party has already taken/ charged a sum of Rs.3,42,608/- from the complainants for the construction of their house/ building, but he has not completed the construction work as per the stipulated date mentioned in the agreement dated 17.12.2015. The Opposite Party has issued receipts in favour of the complainants admitting this  fact  regarding the receipt of Rs.3,42,608/- in installments. Furthermore, as per the terms and conditions of the agreement  the rate for construction of the ground floor was settled at Rs.125/- per square feet and the construction for the first floor was settled at Rs.135/- per square feet and rate for construction of monty on the second floor was settled for Rs.140/- per square feet. But the Opposite Party has charged more money from the complainants in comparison to the work done by him.  Thereafter on 4.6.2016, when the last payment was actually made to the Opposite Party by the complainants, the Opposite Party has stopped construction work in the house and has not completed the construction work undertaken by him as per the requirement and as per the agreement dated 17.12.2015 without any genuine reasons.  It is pertinent to mention over here that the plaster on one side is yet to be  done by the Opposite Party. Moreover, slabs in the kitchen are yet to be constructed. The Opposite Party has not constructed the front boundary wall in the premises. The fitting of gate is yet to be done by the Opposite Party. Not only this, the Opposite Party has not done the work of covering of sanitary  pipes and electricity pipes till date.  The Opposite Party has not fitted the tiles in the premises. The plaster on the outer walls is yet to be done by the Opposite Party. Lastly as per the agreement dated 17.12.2015, the Opposite Party was supposed to finish the entire construction work by 31.5.2016, but the Opposite Party has not completed even half of agreement which he was supposed to finish. Moreover, the complainants used to clear the dues of Opposite Party every weekend, but inspite of fact that the Opposite Party has received more money than what he has done/ completed the construction work, still he has stopped the construction work, meaning thereby that Opposite Party has  already received a payment of Rs.3,42,608/- but he has done the construction work worth about Rs.2,42,000/- i.e. there is a huge difference between the payment received by the Opposite Party and construction work done by him. The complainants had requested the Opposite Party on numerous occasions to complete the construction work as per the terms and conditions of the agreement in question and not to harass them, but the Opposite Party has refused to listen  to the complainants and hence the necessity of filing the present complaint has arisen.

6.       To prove  their averments, the complainants have placed on record copy of sale deed Ex.C2, copy of agreement Ex.C3, copy of detail Ex.C4, copies of receipts Ex.C5 to Ex.C20, copy of rough detail Ex.C21 and Ex.C22, copies of photographs Ex.C23 to Ex.C25 and all these documents are duly supported by an duly sworn affidavit of the complainant No.1 Prem Kumari Ex.C1. On the other hand, none appeared  on behalf of the Opposite Party to defend his case and to rebut the aforesaid contentions of the complainants. In this way, the Opposite Party has  impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Party has no defence to offer or defend the complaint. In prayer clause, though the complainants have sought for the relief to direct the Opposite Party  to discontinue the deficiency in service and moreover the opposite party may further be directed to complete the construction work as per the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 17.12.2015 besides direction to the Opposite Party to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- to the complainants for causing mental tension, agony and harassment to them at the hands of the Opposite Party and costs of  litigation. But at later stage during arguments, on 27.1.2017  ld.counsel for the complainant has made statement that  he does not want to press for the first relief mentioned in the prayer clause of the complaint meaning thereby that the complainants do not want to get the remaining construction work completed from the Opposite Party. It is not disputed that the Opposite Party has charged Rs.3,42,608/- against the work done of Rs.2,42,000/-. In our considered view, it will not be in the interest of the justice and keeping in view the litigation between the parties, it is not expected from the Opposite Party that he will complete the remaining construction work at the premises of the complainants with full dedication and sincerity and as per the satisfaction of the complainants.    

7.       In our considered view, the Opposite Party is directed to refund the excess amount charged from the complainants i.e. Rs.1,00,608/- (Rupees one lac, six hundred and eight only) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of last and final payment made by the complainant to the Opposite Party. But however, the claim for compensation and litigation expenses  to the tune of Rs.30,000/-  is concerned, the same appears to be exorbitant and excessive. The rationale behind grant of compensation has been to compensate a party of the loss occasioned by it. It is none of the intention of the legislature while legislating the Consumer Protection Act to enrich a particular party at the cost of the other. The compensation has to be awarded in commensuration with the loss occasioned to the complainant. In our considered view, ends of justice would  be fully met if the complainant is awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.2000/- and we award the same accordingly. Besides this, the complainant is also entitled to litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.1000/-. Opposite Party is granted one month time to comply with the order, failing which  the complainant would have a right to get this order enforced through the indulgence of this Forum.   The complaint stands allowed accordingly. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 02.02.2017.