Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

102/2015

S.Archana - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.Pradeep - Opp.Party(s)

C.Prasana venkatesh

12 Feb 2016

ORDER

                                                              Complaint presented on:  11.06.2015

                                                                  Order pronounced on:  12.02.2016

 

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

 

FRIDAY THE  12^th  DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016

 

C.C.NO.102/2015

 

 

Mrs. S.Archana,

D/O Mr.Sundararaj,

(Power Agent)

Residing at

No.164 B, Thiruneelakandan Nagar,

Kavankarai, Puzhual,

Chennai – 600 066.

                                                                                                 ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

 

Mr.P.Pradeep,

Proprietor,

M/S Posh Construction,

No.563, P.H.Road,

Arubakkam,

Chennai – 600 106.

	...Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                  08.07.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      :C.Prasanna Venkatesh

Counsel for opposite party                      : 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 Complainant is the owner of the property situated at Plot No.103 B, Survey Nos. 39/3b at Muthu Nagar, Alias LSS, Vijaya Avenue, Nungambakkam Village Thiruvallur Taluk and he proposed to put up a  residential building on the said plot. The Opposite Party is a builder who offered to undertake to construct the building measuring plinth area of 814 sq.ft, stair case measuring 92 sq.ft at a cost of Rs.1,567/- per sq.ft  and marble flooring for  560 sq.ft at the rate of Rs.50 per sq.ft and thus the total cost of the construction  arrived at Rs.14,48,000/-. The Opposite Party agreed to complete the building in 4 months from the date of commencement on 27.07.2014.  The Opposite Party also received a sum of Rs.11,56,200/- on various dates from the month of July 2014 to December 2014. However the Opposite Party has not completed the construction within a period of 4 months as agreed and a supplementary agreement was entered on 25.12.2014 and the time was extended to handover possession on 10.03.2015. The balance sum of Rs.3,28,000/- was paid on the same day. Again the work was not completed and further 2 weeks time was extended mutually and also a sum of Rs.85,000/- was paid by the Complainant for additional work and  even after that the work was not completed. Hence the Complainant issued Ex.A5 dated 06.04.2014 legal notice to the Opposite Party. Even after such notice the Opposite Party has not completed the construction and handed over the possession as agreed by the Opposite Party and therefore the Complainant filed this Complaint for the deficiency committed by the Opposite Party for not completing the construction and handed over the possession. Hence this Complaint.

          2. The Opposite Party received notice and on his behalf a counsel undertook to file vakalath and inspite of sufficient time given, vakalath for Opposite Party not filed and hence the Opposite Party was set Ex parte on 26.08.2015.

          3. The Complainant filed proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to A6 marked. Complainant also filed written arguments and her oral arguments heard.

4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

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

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

5. POINT: 1

          The case of the Complainant is that he owned a plot at No.103B Survey Nos. 39/3b  at Muthu Nagar,  Alias LSS, Vijaya Avenue, Nungambakkam Village  Thiruvallur Taluk  and in the said plot she wanted to construct a residential building and the Opposite Party undertook to construct the said building and accordingly both of  them  entered  into an construction agreement (Ex.A4) and the Opposite Party  agreed to construct the said house for a plinth area of 906 sq.ft including stair case and marble flooring for 560sq.ft at a total cost of construction of Rs.14,48,000/- and agreed to complete the construction within 4 months from the date of commencement on 27.07.2014 and however he failed to complete the same  and further Ex.A3 supplementary agreement to extend the time was entered between  them and as per that supplementary agreement he agreed to handover on or  before 10.03.2015  and even after that he has not completed the construction and handed over the building and again  2 weeks time was extended on 20.02.2015 and even after that the  Opposite Party has not completed and handed over the possession inspite of that he had received the cost of construction of Rs.14,48,000/- and also additional cost of Rs.85,000/- and further even after issuance of Ex.A5 legal notice dated 06.04.2015 and even after filing of the Complaint till date the Opposite Party has not completed and handed over the possession of the house. The Opposite Party remained ex parte and there is no contra evidence on his behalf. Hence it is held that the entire evidence of the Complainant is accepted and the same has been supported by the documents filed by her and hence it is further held that the Opposite Party has committed Deficiency in Service in not completing the construction and handing over the possession inspite of that he had received the entire consideration referred in the Ex.A4 construction agreement.

6. POINT:2

          The Opposite Party has not completed the construction and even after extension of the time to complete the construction twice and failed to complete and hand over the possession even after receiving consideration that the Complainant suffered with mental agony and she has to be compensated for the same is accepted. Further the Complainant is also entitled to get possession of the house from the Opposite Party after completing the construction. The Complainant prayed a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- for the use of substandard quality materials and for replacement of the same.  No evidence adduced by the Complainant that the substandard quality of materials has been used. Further there is no agreement that the Complainant is entitled for rent for a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month if the construction is not completed within the stipulated time and so also interest. Therefore the Complainant is not entitled for the amount claimed for the use of substandard quality materials and for rental income from March 2015 to till date  and interest at the rate of 0.75% from 27.07.2014.  However the Complainant is entitled for a direction  to get the possession of the house from the Opposite Party, compensation  for mental agony and for litigation expenses only.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is ordered to complete the construction and handover the possession of the house within 3 months from the date of this order and the Opposite Party is also ordered to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and also pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses. The above amounts shall be payable to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the amounts 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 February 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex. A1 dated  NIL                   Power Deed

Ex.A2 dated 10.09.2013                   Patta  & sale deed

Ex.A3 dated 25.12.2014                   Consent deed

Ex.A4 dated 16.07.2014                   Construction agreement

Ex.A5 dated   NIL                    Legal Notice

Ex.A6 dated 13.05.2014                   Receipt

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT