By. Sri. K. Gheevarghese,President:-
The complaint filed against the opposite party for the defective well digging and for cost and compensation.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The complainant entrusted the opposite party to dig a well and to lay 30 concrete rings. The terms agreed in between complainant and opposite party is such that the opposite party had to dig the soil and to insert concrete ring, the cost estimated for each ring is Rs.1,250/-. The work was decided to be started on 09.05.2009 and to be completed on 10.06.2009 and an agreement was executed in that effect.
3. The opposite party started the digging work and the laying of the rings were not fully done. Up to a depth of 6 to 7 rings the soil was removed but the work was not completed. The opposite party instead of completing the ring work and digging of soil droped the work and left the place. The complainant repeatedly requested the opposite party for the completion of the work whereas the opposite party was not ready to complete the work. The complaint is to get back the advance amount of Rs.20,000/- received by the opposite party along with interest and for compensation Rs.10,000/-.
4. The opposite party filed version in short it is as follows:- The digging of the soil and putting rings are admitted by the opposite party. The terms agreed in between the complainant and opposite party to dig the soil and to put rings cost Rs.1,250/- per each ring and the terms agreed
between complainant and opposite party is that 30 rings are to be put in the well after digging and the rings if more than 30 is required for each additional ring above 30 numbers Rs.1,500/- paid by the complainant. The agreement executed between complainant and opposite party was not on the date as avered in the complaint. The well digging work was entrusted to this opposite party on finding satisfactory the well work done in the adjacent property to the complainant. The opposite party was not given Rs.20,000/- at a time as per the terms agreed in between complainant and opposite party. Some preparatory works were to be done by the complainant. Even in the absence of agreed work of the complainant this opposite party dug the well and laid 9 rings. The materials required for concrete rings were conveyed to the site at the risk of this opposite party. However the opposite party dug the well at a depth of 42 feets and water was not found in the well. Even in such depth the opposite party along with workers put 8 rings in the well and when the 9th ring was inserting into the well the side of the well was slided in. The workers were narrowly escaped from
the possible calamity. The complainant was fully aware of these facts. The opposite party all together had 51 works the wages he paid for each worker was Rs.350/- in total the opposite party is to be paid Rs.17,850/- the material cost and transport expenses if considered together this opposite party had an expense Rs.25,500/-. The complainant paid only 20,000/-, Rs.5,200/- is still due from the complainant. The complaint filed is only because of the dislike of the complainant when the opposite party demanded the amount due from the complainant. The complaint filed is not based on a genuine reasons it is to be dismissed with cost.
5. The points in consideration are:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in the digging of the well?
2. Relief and Cost.
6. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consist of the proof affidavit of complainant. Exts.A1,A2 and the oral testimony of the complainant and the witness are also considered.
7. The dispute in issue is in respect of the non completion of the well works. Ext.A1 is the agreement executed between the complainant and opposite party. There in Rs.20,000/- is received by the opposite party for the digging of well and concrete rings. The complainant has no case that the well works is not started by the opposite party but it is not completed and the works were dropped by the opposite party. The opposite party pleaded that the incompletion of the well work is for the reasons beyond his capacity and vigilance. The earth was slided into the well and the rings
which were already laid in the well were covered by the earth. According to the opposite party around Rs.5,000/- is due from the complainant for the works completed. The complainant also admitted that opposite party dug out soil for a depth of laying 30 rings. The digging work has done near about 42 feet in depth. The complainant has no knowledge of how much ring were laid in to the well. According to her around 6 to 7 rings were laid in the well. The complainant cannot come to a conclusion for what reasons work could not be completed. From the oral testimony of this complainant it is to be considered that the opposite party had done the work for 60% of the amount received in advance. The opposite party did not tender any evidence to substantiate the contention. From the above inferences 40% of the amount received by the opposite party is to be refunded to the complainant for the incomplete work.
In result the opposite party is directed to return Rs.8,000/- (Rupees Eight Thousand Only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. This is to be complied by the opposite party within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 30th September 2011.
Date of filing:16.11.2010.
