BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FEROZEPUR.
C.C. No.264 of 2014 Date of Institution: 11.7.2014
Date of Decision: 18.12.2014
Punjab Singh, aged 40 years, son of Rattan Singh, resident of V.P.O. Dulchi Ke, Tehsil and District Ferozepur.
....... Complainant
Versus
1. Narinder Singh, Proprietor of Harman Glass House, Industrial Area, Near Baba Ram Lal Gurudwara, Ferozepur City.
2. Lal Bhawani Steels, B-15/555/IC, Punjab and Sind Bank, Gill Road, Ludhiana-141003, through its Authorized Signatory.
........ Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
* * * * *
PRESENT :
For the complainant : Sh. G.S. Mal, Advocate
For opposite party No.1 : Sh. Chander Shekhar Sharma, Advocate
For opposite party No.2 : Sh. Sukhpal Singh Sidhu, Advocate
QUORUM
S. Gurpartap Singh Brar, President
S. Gyan Singh, Member
ORDER
GURPARTAP SINGH BRAR, PRESIDENT:-
Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is constructing his new house at his above said given address. The opposite
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\2//
parties are dealing with interior and glass decoration as well as stair railing.The complainant approached opposite party No.1 for the purpose of constructing a wooden/crystal stair railing and after making assessment, opposite party No.1 finalized a deal with the complainant for constructing a stair railing in the house of the complainant and in this regard, steel balls, wooden pieces, 26 wooden/glass pillers along with 3 main pillers, steel pipes, crystal pieces and some other raw material were selected by the complainant for construction of the stair railing. Some of the raw material i.e. crystal piece, which were selected by the complainant, were not available at the shop of opposite party No.1 and he assured the complainant to get the same from opposite party No.2, as he has dealing with opposite party No.2 on regular basis and opposite party No.1 always purchased the raw material from opposite party No.2 and he called opposite party No.2 to confirm about crystal pieces, which were going to be fixed in stair railing pillars. After finalizing the deal, opposite party No.1 on his letter paid, pen down the assessments of the raw material of the stair railing and opposite party No.1 charged Rs.30,000/- from the complainant as labour charges for the construction of railing and approximately Rs.70,000/- for wooden pieces and other raw material except crystal pieces. Opposite party No.1 on confirmation from opposite party No.2 charged Rs.3350/- from the complainant when the employee of opposite party No.2 delivered the raw
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\3//
material including 12 pieces of crystal to the complainant and a slip under the name of Lal Bhawani Steels was issued by the employee of opposite party No.2 and promised to deliver the remaining crystal pieces and bill of the same. Opposite party No.1 started construction of the stair railing and fixed 10 pillars of the stair railing in the house of the complainant and after that opposite parties called off the labour work in the house of the complainant for construction of stair railing. Thereafter, the complainant many a times, called both the opposite parties on mobile to inquire about the matter, but opposite party No.1 made excuse that opposite party No.2 was not sending the remaining pieces of the crystal that’s why opposite party No.1 was not able to complete the construction of the stair railing and opposite party No.2 also lingered on the mater on one pretext or another. The complainant got served a legal notice dated 2.6.2014 upon the opposite parties through registered post, but to no effect. Pleading deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has prayed that opposite party No.2 be directed to send the remaining pieces of the crystal and opposite party No.1 be directed to complete the construction of the stair railing in the house of the complainant or the opposite parties be directed to refund Rs.1,00,000/- as labour charges and expenses of raw material from the opposite parties. Further a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been claimed as compensation for
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\4//
harassment and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed their respective written replies to the complaint. In his written reply, opposite party No. 1 has admitted almost all the allegations levelled in the complaint. It has been pleaded that oppostie party No.2 is not sending the remaining pieces of the crystal that is why opposite party No.1 is not able to complete the construction of the stair railing. However, any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party No.1 has been denied and dismissal of the complaint qua opposite party No.1 has been prayed for.
3. In its written reply, opposite party No.2 has pleaded that neither opposite party No.2 has any dealing with opposite party No.1 Narinder Singh, Proprietor of M/s Harnam Glass House nor opposite party No.2 is a party to the alleged contract between the complainant and opposite party No.1 for construction of stair railing. Opposite party No.2 is under no obligation to send any crystal pieces, as called upon by the complainant. Further it has been pleaded that opposite party No.1 is not dealer of opposite party No.2 and the alleged slip pads of opposite party No.2 are lying with the sale representatives of opposite party No.2, who give the same to every shopkeeper for advertisemet, where they visit. The handwriting on the alleged estimate slip is not of opposite party No.2.
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\5//
Opposite party No.2 is dealing in stainless steel and raw material. There is no business dealing between opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.1. The complainant has never personally purchased crystal pieces from opposite party No.2 at Ludhiana against bill on cash payment nor any money has ever been received by opposite party No.2 against the alleged contract either from the client or from opposite party No.1. Other allegations of the complaint have been denied and dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
4. Learned counsel for complainant tendered into evidence Ex. C-1 to Ex. C-9 and closed evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party No.1 closed evidence on behalf of opposite party No.1 without tendering any document. Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 tendered into evidence Ex.OP-2/1 and closed evidence on behalf of opposite party No.2.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for parties and have also gone through the file.
6. The grievance of the complainant is that he approached opposite party No.1 for construction of stair railing in his house and after finalizing the deal, opposite party No.1 on his letter pad Ex.C-6 pen down the assessment of the raw material of the stair railing and charged Rs.30,000/- as labour charges and Rs.70,000/- approximately for raw
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\6//
material from the complainant, but the opposite parties have left the construction work of stair railing midway and have not completed the same despited repeated requests of the complainant as well as service of legal notice upon the opposite parties by the complainant. Opposite party No.1, in his written reply, has admitted almost all the allegations of the complaint and has pleaded that oppostie party No.2 is not sending the remaining pieces of crystal that is why opposite party No.1 is not able to complete the construction of the stair railing. Admittedly, the deal to construct the stair railing in the house of the complainant was finalized between the complainant and opposite party No.1 and Rs.30,000/- as labour charges and approximately Rs.70,000/- as cost of the raw material were received by opposite party No.1 from the complainant for constructio of the said stair railing. The complainant has no direct dealing with opposite party No.2 and the complainant himself has neither purchased any material from opposite party No.2 nor has paid any consideration to opposite party No.2. Opposite party No.2 has specifically denied that the handwriting on the alleged estimate slip Ex.C-5 is not of opposite party No.2 nor any alleged promise was ever made by opposite party No.2 or its sale representative. Opposite party No.2 has further pleaded that the alleged slip pads of opposite party No.2 are lying with its sale representatives, who gives the same to every shopkeeper for advertisement, where they visit. Therefore, the onus to
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\7//
prove that opposite party No.2 had promised/agreed to supply the alleged raw material for construction of stair railing in the house of the complainant was upon the complainant, but the complainant has failed to discharge this liabliity by leading any congent and convincing evidence. Though opposite party No.1 has admitted/pleaded in his written reply that opposite party No.2 charged Rs.3350/- from the complainant, when the employee of opposite party No.2 delivered the raw material including 12 pieces of crystal to the complainant and issued a slip Ex.C-5 under the name of Lal Bhawani Steels and promised to deliver the remaining crystal pieces and bill of the same, but opposite party No.1 also has not produced any evidece on the record to prove this assertion. Even opposite party No.1 also has not tendered into evidence his own affidavit submitted with his written reply. Therefore, admission of the allegations of the complaint by opposite party No.1 is also not helpful to prove the allegations of the complaint. Therefore, no case of deficiency in service or unfiar trade practice is made out against opposite party No.2. However, the work of stair railing of the house of the complainant is still incomplete for which a deal was finalized between the complainant and opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.1 had received labour charges and cost of raw material from the complainant, as has himself been admitted by opposite party No.1. Therefore, oppostie party No.1 is liable to complete the remaining
C.C. No.264 of 2014 \\8//
work at his own responsibility.
6. In view of what has been discussed above, the present complaint is accepted and opposite party No.1 is directed to complete the agreed work of stair railing at his own responsibility in the house of the complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs. 3000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. This order is directed to be complied with by opposite party No.1 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, complaint against opposite party No.2 stands dismissed. File be consigned to record room.
Announced 18.12.2014
(Gurpartap Singh Brar)
President
(Gyan Singh )
Member
