Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/87/2015

K.Bhavani - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.JP and RS Associates - Opp.Party(s)

T.N.Sugesh and S.Shinu

12 Jan 2017

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  04.04.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  12.01.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

THURSDAY THE 12^th    DAY OF JANUARY 2017

 

C.C.NO.87/2015

 

 

Ms.K.Bhavani,

W/oMr.K.S.Maniyan,

Respondent:Door No.395, Thiru Vi Ka Nagar,

Chennai – 600 011.

 

                                                                                         ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

	1.M/s. JP & RS Associates, Rep by its Partner Mr. J.Sherman, S/o Mr. Robert Massappa, Regd Office: Shop No:2, No.285, Velachery Main Road, Chennai – 600 073.   2.Mr.J.Sherman, S/o. Mr.Robert Massappa, Shop No.2, No.285, Velachery Main Road, Chennai – 600 073.
	...Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                  : 04.06.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.T.N.Sugesh & S.Shinu

 

Counsel for 1^st & 2^nd Opposite Parties     :Ex - parte

 

O R D E R

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Parties 1 & 2 is builders. The Complainant had entered into an agreement with the 1^st Opposite Party on 25.07.2012 for the construction of a residential ‘Duplex House’ in the ground floor at Door No.395, Thiruvika Nagar, and Chennai – 11. As per the said agreement the Opposite Party agreed to construct an extent of 947 sq ft., exclusive of car park area.  The Complainant paid total consideration of Rs.22,39,000/- towards the cost of construction as per the aforesaid agreement. The possession of the building was handed over at the end of the year 2013. However, the Opposite Parties constructed the house 100 sq ft. lesser than what was agreed by them to construct in the agreement. When the Complainant questioned the same, the Opposite Parties told him that they will compensate the 100 sq ft. in the 1^st floor, which they agreed to construct for her cousin sister Ms. Vaani Shree. However as stated above they did not construct. The cost of construction for an extent of 100 sq ft amounting to Rs.2,36,430/-. Therefore the Opposite Parties neglected to construct an extent of 947 sq ft. as agreed and instead constructed lesser extent of  100 sq ft than the agreed extent proves that they have committed deficiency in service. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint against the Opposite Parties to direct them to repay a sum of Rs.2,36,430/- with interest from July 2012 and also compensation for  mental agony with cost of the Complaint.         

2. Though the Opposite Parties received notice, they did not appear on 14.03.2016 and hence the Opposite Parties called absent and set Ex-parte.

          3. The Complainant had filed his proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 were marked on the side of the Complainant.

          4. The Complainant had also come filed written argument and oral argument of the Complainant was heard.        

5.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

6.POINT : 1

          The case of the Complainant is that the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 are builders and  the Complainant had entered into an agreement with the 1^st Opposite Party on 25.07.2012 for the construction of a residential ‘Duplex House ‘  in the ground floor at Door No.395, Thiruvika Nagar, Chennai – 11 and as per the said agreement the Opposite Parties agreed to construct an extent of 947 sq ft., exclusive of car park area and the Complainant also  paid total consideration of Rs.22,39,000/- towards the cost of construction as per the  aforesaid agreement and the possession of the building was handed over at the end of the year 2013.

          7. After taking possession of the house, the Complainant found that the Opposite Parties constructed 100 sq ft. lesser than as agreed to construct 947 sq ft. as per Ex.A1. Ex.A2 is the plan provided by the Opposite Parties to the Complainant. In the said plan the ground floor area measured as 813.83 sq ft.  Therefore Ex.A1 agreement and  Ex.A2 plan proves that the Opposite Parties constructed approximately 100 sq ft. lesser than what was agreed to construct by them to the Complainant. Therefore, the Opposite Parties even after receiving the full amount as per agreement to construct the house, that they have constructed 100 sq ft  lesser area is deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties and therefore, it is held that the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 have committed deficiency in service.

8. POINT NO:2

           Ex.A5 & Ex.A6 proves that the Complainant paid entire cost of construction as per Ex.A1 agreement. The Complainant estimated the cost of construction for 100 sq ft. amounted to Rs.2,36,430/-. Since the Opposite Parties constructed such lesser area referred above, the Complainant is entitled to refund of the sum of Rs.2,36,430/-  for the lesser area. The Complainant took possession of the house at the end of the year 2013.  Therefore it would be appropriate to order to refund the amount of Rs. 2,36,430/-  with 9% interest from January 2014 onwards to till the date of order is justifiable. Apart from that  due to deficiency committed by the Opposite Parties, the Complainant suffered with mental agony and  for the same, it would be appropriate to order a sum of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony ,besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite parties jointly or severally are ordered to refund a sum of Rs.2,36,430/- (Rupees  two lakhs thirty six  thousand  four hundred and thirty only) for constructing lesser area to the Complainant   with 9% interest  from the date of  January 2014 till the date of this order  and also to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses. Regarding other reliefs the Complaint is dismissed.

          The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.       

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 12^th day of January 2017.

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 25.07.2012                            Building Agreement

Ex.A2 dated  NIL                              Sketch

Ex.A3 dated 05.01.2015                            Advocate Notice issued to the Opposite

                                                              Parties

Ex.A4 dated NIL                               Returned Postal Cover

Ex.A5 dated  26.09.2012                           Home Loan Agreement with Housing

                                                              Development Finance Corporation

Ex.A6 dated 10.04.2012                            Bank Statement issued by ICICI Bank

                  to 10.04.2013                      pertaining to the Complainant’s account

 

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT