Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/10/480

SHRI RAFIQUE SAEED TANDEL - Complainant(s)

Versus

MR RAGHUNATH M BHOIR - Opp.Party(s)

P B KADAM

28 Jul 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
First Appeal No. A/10/480
(Arisen out of Order Dated 12/03/2010 in Case No. 01/2010 of District Raigarh)
1. SHRI RAFIQUE SAEED TANDELR/O MADHALA KOLIWADA NEAR BEKRY REVDANDA ALIBAUG RAIGAD RaigadMaharastra ...........Appellant(s)

Versus
1. MR RAGHUNATH M BHOIR B-3/32/1/1 SECTOR 15 ASHTAVINAYAK HSG SOC. VASHI NEW MUMBAI 400703Navi MumbaiMaharastra ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE :
Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase PRESIDENTHon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode Judicial MemberHon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
PRESENT :Mr.A.V.Patwardhan,Advocate, Proxy for P B KADAM , Advocate for for the Appellant 1 R.G.Biradar, Advocate for the Respondent 1

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

 

 

This appeal takes an exception to an order dated 12/3/2010 passed in consumer complaint no.1/2010 Mr.Raghunath Mahadeo Bhoir v/s. Rafique Saeed Tandel passed by District Consumer Forum, Raigad (‘forum below’ in short). It is a case of respondent /original complainant that he entered into an agreement with appellant/original O.P. dated 02/04/2007 for construction of his house along with wire compound. Total cost of the construction was estimated at Rs.6,00,786/- and the work was to be completed before 02/7/2007. Additional work was agreed to be carried out at Rs.70,000/-. Complainant in all paid Rs.5,80,511/- from time to time. However, till the end of May 2008 work worth Rs.3,08,800/- was only completed and, thereafter, appellant stopped the work and left without completing the same. Appellant was requested by the complainant either to complete the work or refund excess amount paid to him.  Such a request met with no response and, therefore, consumer complaint is filed. 

Forum below uphold the contention and directed the appellant to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental and physical torture and Rs.2000/- as cost. Feeling aggrieved thereby this appeal is preferred by the original O.P.

Work was left incomplete is the fact, which is not in dispute.  Appellant/org.O.P. raised the contention in respect of only few items which according to him were not agreed to be constructed. The documents on record negatives his such contention. Furthermore, appellant tried to raise certain dispute as to the accounts but considering preponderance of probabilities and particularly, taking into consideration that he remains unresponsive to the notices dated 14/6/2008 and 07/9/2009 sent to him by the respondent/complainant pointing him the work he has left uncompleted and excess amount paid and whereby respondent/ original complainant requested to him either to complete work or refund the excess amount paid to him; we find forum below rightly appreciated the circumstances and material placed before it. It only directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for physical and mental torture and cost of Rs.2000/-.  This order is not challenged in appeal by the complainant.  From the point of view of the original opposite party, said order cannot be held as arbitrary in the background of the circumstances of this case. Thus, we find appeal devoid of any substance and holding accordingly we pass following order:-

                                                          ORDER

Appeal stands dismissed with no order as to costs.

 

 

 

PRONOUNCED :
Dated : 28 July 2010

[Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase]PRESIDENT[Hon'ble Mr. S.R. Khanzode]Judicial Member[Hon'ble Mr. Dhanraj Khamatkar]Member