BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 05/08/2011
Date of Order : 29/02/2012
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 414/2011
Between
Sini Biju, | :: | Complainant |
Poonattu House, Varappetty. P.O., Elangavam, Kothamangalam. |
| (By Adv. Tom Joseph, Court Road, Muvattupuzha – 686 661) |
And
P.N. Biju, S/o. Narayanan. P | :: | Opposite Party |
Poonattu House, Vangalloor Kara, Purappuzha .P.O., Thodupuzha – 685 583. |
| (Absent) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
The complainant and the opposite party, who is a building contractor entered into an agreement dated 13-01-2011 for the construction of a house in the complainant's property in Varappetty Village. The opposite party agreed to construct the house at the rate of Rs. 1,150/- per square foot within 7 months form the date of agreement. The opposite party carried out a portion of the structural work, eventhough he has received a total sum of Rs. 10,89,900/- from the complainant. The opposite party had finished the work amounting to Rs. 7,94,460/- only. So, the complainant had to pay an amount of Rs. 2,95,440/- in excess to the opposite party. The complainant is entitled to get refund of the excess amount together with compensation of Rs. 25,000/-. This complaint hence.
2. The opposite party refused to accept the notice issued by this Forum which amounts to acceptance of notice basically as per law prescribed. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 and A2 were marked on the side of the complainant. The expert commissioner's report was marked as Ext. C1. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 2,95,440/- from the opposite party together with compensation of Rs. 25,000/-?
4. Ext. A1 is the agreement entered into between the complainant and the opposite party for the construction of the residential building of the complainant. Ext. A1 goes to show that the opposite party has received a total sum of Rs. 10,89,900/- from the complainant. During evidence at the instance of the complainant, an expert commissioner was appointed by this Forum and her report was marked as Ext. C1. As per Ext C1 report, the total work carried out by the opposite party was estimated at Rs. 7,62,210/- only. But as per the complaint, the complainant herself seems to have assessed the value of the work done by the opposite party at Rs. 7,94,460/- eroniously and not explained to disentitle the complainant for further. The opposite party's conspicuous absence in this Forum to controvert the findings of the expert commission is still unexplained which alone brings us to a decision that there is no illegality for her legal claim as affirmed by the expert commissioner.
5. In the above circumstances, we allow the complaint and direct that the opposite party shall refund Rs. 3,27,690/- (Rupees three lakhs twenty seven thousand six hundred and ninety only) having been found collected extra as per Ext. C1 report and not having been repudiated by the opposite party together with an amount of Rs. 25,000/- by way of compensation.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at 12% p.a. till payment.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29th day of February 2012.
Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | A copy of the agreement dt. 13-01-2011 |
“ A2 | :: | Copy of the quotation given by the op.pty |
“ C1 | :: | Commission report dt. 10-12-2011 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
