By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
1.The complaint in short is as follows: -
Complainant is a licensed PWD contractor. On 18/04/2021 complainant purchased some RCC pipe for placing crossly from one end of the road to another end for the expulsion of drainage water. When approaching the opposite party for buying the above pipe, opposite party suggested a pipe having two metre length and 1.5 metre width. He assured that the above pipe will not be damaged even a vehicle having tones of weight will cross over the pipe. He assured 25 years guarantee for the above pipe and he also said that he will replace the pipe if it got damaged .Believing the assurance given by opposite party, complainant ordered three RCC pipes having a cost of Rs.2,850/- for one piece. complainant paid an amount of Rs.8,550/- to opposite party and opposite party provided a bill having a seal and signature of him over the bill.
2. Complainant purchased above three pipes worth Rs. 8,550/- and he also paid Rs.250/-for loading and unloading of the pipes to opposite party. Moreover he stated that he had also paid to opposite party Rs.750/- as the coolie for 3 persons and he also paid Rs.900/- as the rent of the vehicle. Moreover complainant had spent Rs.2,500/- for taking JCB for rent to put the pipes in the work site .On the same day complainant installed the pipes nearly 3 feet depth from the surface of the road by cutting the road from left to right . In that way he completed the work.
3. But on the same day, the pipe broken while a vehicle passing through the road. At once complainant informed the matter to opposite party and opposite party promised that he will change the pipe with new pipes later. But opposite party informed the complainant that now the product is out of stock. After two days one of the representatives of the company approached complainant and he realised that the complaint raised by complainant is true. He also promised the complainant that the pipes will be replaced. But there is no reply from opposite party and as well as the company. Then complainant approached opposite party in person and complainant wanted to replace the pipe. On 07/09/2021 complainant approached opposite party for giving new pipes instead of damaged pipes or he wanted to refund the amount he had already paid for purchasing the damaged low quality pipe provided by opposite party to complainant. But opposite party did not take any steps to solve the problem. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite party, complainant was unable to complete the Thanur, Puthiya Kadappuram, New road. Moreover due to the act of opposite party, the road work also stopped and the bills given to that Department regarding the works already taken by complainant were also not passed by them. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite party, complainant faced a huge monitory loss and disgrace in the society. Hence this complaint.
4. The prayer of the complainant is that, he is entitled to get a full refund of Rs. 8,550/- the cost of the RCC Pipes, Rs.750/- as the amount spent for loading and unloading of the pipes, Rs. 900/- as the rent of the vehicle, Rs. 50,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
5. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and
notice served on them and they appeared before the Commission through their counsel and filed vakkalath on 20/12/2021. But no version filed. Thereafter they filed version on 06/07/2022 which is beyond the statutory period of 45 days. Hence they set exparte. Thereafter complainant filed affidavit and one document.
6. In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit in
lieu of Chief examination and the documents he produced one document which is marked as Ext. A1. Ext.A1 is the original bill having seal and signature of opposite party.
7. Heard the complainant and perused the affidavit and documents filed by complainant. The allegation against opposite party is proved by the unchallenged evidence of complainant. There is no contra evidence in this matter. Moreover complainant produced one document which is very supportive to prove his case. Hence the Commission finds that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint. Hence we allow this complaint holding that opposite party is deficient in service.
8. We allow this complaint as follows:-
The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 8,550/-(Rupees Eight thousand five hundred and fifty only) the cost of the pipes to the complainant.
The opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) to the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant.
The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
If the above said amount is not paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the opposite party is liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till realisation.
Dated this 23rd day of March, 2023.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1
Ext.A1 : Original bill having seal and signature of opposite party.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
CPR
