Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/17/114

Jagdish Upadhyay - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. Prakash Giri, M/S Arya Bihar Homemakers - Opp.Party(s)

J.P. Jha

27 Apr 2023

ORDER

                District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro

Date of Filing-08-08-2017

Date of final hearing-27-04-2023

 Date of Order-27-04-2023

Case No. 114/2017

Sri Jagdish Upadhayay S/o- Late Haribansh Upadhyay

R/o Araya vihar, Rajendra Nagar Bari co- Co-operative,

 Sijua District- Bokaro, Pin 827001

Vs.

M/s Arya Bihar Homemakers

Represented by Mr. Prakash Giri S/o- Sri Kishun Giri,

Managing Director, City Center, Sector-04,

Bokaro Steel City District Bokaro, Pin-827004

 

Present:-

                             Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

                  Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

PER- J.P.N Pandey, President

-:Order:-

1. Complainant’s case in brief is that he entered into agreement on 09.04.2014 with O.P. for construction of a building on the plot purchased by him vide sale deed No. 8996/8414 dt. 19.12.2012 for the construction cost of Rs. 32,78,750/-. Construction was to be completed  within 24 months with grace period of 6 months and complainant paid total Rs. 29,72,000/- till 09.12.2013 but construction of the building was not completed, rather in the year 2013 construction was started which was left in the month of Nov. 2014 hence remaining finishing work, marble flooring, door, windows, electrical and plumbing work with sanitary fittings was done by the complainant through his own cost. Further case is that complainant obtained valuation report from Chartered Engineer accordingly the construction work completed by the O.P. is having value of Rs. 22,70,000/- only against the payment of Rs. 29,72,000/- hence complainant is entitled to recover Rs. 8,08,000/- from the O.P. and also entitled for compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the O.P. hence this case has been filed.
2. Inspite of due service of notice O.P. has not appeared hence vide order dt. 24.02.2018 case is being proceeded Ex-parte against O.P.
3. Complainant has produced photo copy of agreement deed (Annexure-A), photo copy of sale deed (Annexure-B), photo copy of report of the valuer (Annexure-C), photo copy of legal notice dt. 04.03.2017 (Annexure-D), photo copy of receipts showing payment to the O.P. (Annexure-E series) and photo copy of passbook of the bank account (Annexure-F series).
4. It is case of the complainant  that O.P. has made construction of the building but it has not been completed by him, rather some of the finishing work and other construction work was done by the complainant. There is no any evidence by the complainant to show that he made payment to the other agencies for purchase of materials and payment of labour cost etc. As per complainant he paid Rs. 29,72,000/- to the O.P. till 09.12.2013 and agreement for construction of building was executed on 09.04.2014. Therefore, it is very much surprising that how complainant has made payment of said amount without any agreement. There is no any  specific evidence by the complainant to show any deficiency on the part of the O.P. On careful perusal of the papers submitted by the complainant it appears that it is not disclosing the fact that at which stage O.P. has left the construction work, nor it is showing that remaining construction work was done by the complainant for which he has paid to different agencies.
5. Therefore,  in light of above discussion we are of the view that complainant has not established his case for grant of relief as prayed. Accordingly this case is being dismissed with cost.

 

(J.P.N. Pandey)

                                                                                      President

 

 

                  

                                                                               (Baby Kumari)

                                                                                       Member