Appellant was the complainant before the State Commission. In pursuance to Memo of Understanding executed between the appellant and the respondent, respondent was to install six passengers elevator at appellant’s Manali Inn for Rs.8 Lac which was later on reduced to Rs.6,65,000/-. Rs.50,000/- were paid by the appellant to the respondent towards first installment on 26.11.1996. Another sum of Rs.4,50,000/- was paid by the appellant to the respondent on 30.11.1996. Respondent because of ground situation at the site showed its inability to install the elevator from the ground floor to sixth floor. According to him lift could only be installed from first floor to fourth floor with four landings. On a request made by the appellant, respondent further reduced the price of lift of Rs.25,000/-. Lift was installed as per agreement. Possession of the lift was taken over by the appellant on 08.01.1997. Alleging that the lift was not working properly as hydraulic gas got heated and stopped functioning frequently appellant filed the complaint before the State Commission. -3- State Commission allowed the appeal in part. It was held that the respondent was somewhat deficient in rendering service. State Commission awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- by way of compensation and Rs.5,000/- as costs. Complainant being aggrieved has filed this appeal seeking more compensation. Initially the respondent had agreed to install the lift covering all the six floors at a price of Rs.8 Lac. Later on, realizing that in Manali where the hotel was situated a lift for six floors could not be provided, respondent agreed to provide lift from first floor to fourth floor and reduced the price from Rs.8 Lac to Rs.6,40,000/-. Appellant agreed for the installation of the lift from first floor to fourth floor. Respondent installed the lift and the appellant took possession of the lift on 01.08.1997. Since the appellant had agreed to installation of the lift from first floor to fourth floor only on payment of Rs.6,40,000/- the plea now taken that the respondent was deficient in rendering service in not providing the lift from ground floor to sixth floor cannot be accepted. There was hardly any deficiency on the part of the respondent. Respondent has not filed the appeal challenging the -4- order of the State Commission. State Commission has rightly awarded a token compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the respondent. No case for enhancement of compensation is made out. Appeal is dismissed. Counsel for the respondent states that he had sent a cheque of Rs.30,000/- ,i.e., Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- towards costs awarded by the State Commission, to the appellant in the year 2007 which was not accepted by him. He states that the appellant shall pay the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.25,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as costs awarded by the State Commission) to the appellant within four weeks from today. |
