Haryana

Ambala

CC/424/2019

Naresh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rajan Chawla - Opp.Party(s)

Mewa Ram

18 Apr 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                                      Complaint case No.:  424 of 2019.

                                                          Date of Institution           :    03.12.2019.

                                                          Date of decision    :    18.04.2022.

 

Naresh Kumar s/o Dharampal, r/o H.No.138/11, Ward No.7, Manav Vihar,  Court Road, Ambala City, 134003, Haryana.

                                                                                      ……. Complainant.

 

Versus

 

M/s Rajan Motors, Chandigarh Road, Baldev Nagar, Ambala City, Haryana (proprietor-Sh. Rajan Chawla) and address as per the Board affixed on the shop, Chawla Tyres, Chandigarh Road, Near Naraingarh Chowk, Baldev Nagar, Ambala City-134007 Haryana.

                                                                                      ..…. Opposite Party.

                            

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                   Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.         

                            

Present:       Sh. Mewa Ram Sounti Advocate, counsel for complainant.

                   Ms. Manisha Bhatnagar, Advocate, counsel for OP.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’). Brief facts of the case are that the complainant for construction of his house, purchased 300 square feet of coarse sand from the OP, who is doing the business of supply of building materials i.e. sand, bajri (crushed stones), bricks and tiles etc and is also having a tyres Showroom.  OP asked him to pay in total a sum of Rs. 7087/- i.e.  Rs. 6750+ Rs. 337 i.e. 5% GST , out of which complainant paid Rs. 2000/- as advance. On 07.12.2017, in the late evening, when it was total dark, OP delivered the sand at the residence of complainant without getting checked the quality of the sand.  At the time of delivery, complainant paid the remaining amount of Rs.5087/-. In the next morning, complainant found that the sand was of inferior quality, lot of soil was mixed in it and sand was very fine. The mason(Mistri) refused to use the same, for construction by saying that it will be harmful for the building. Complainant went to the shop of the OP, to complaint about the poor quality of sand.  OP promised that he will immediately pick up the sand and give him the good quality of sand but OP did not do so. On 10.12.2017, complainant called the proprietor of the OP on his mobile number and requested to supply the good quality of sand but no satisfactory reply was given by him. On 20.12.2017, complainant wrote a letter whereby he apprised the OP that due to lack of sand, the building work had been stopped and due to bad weather, 9 bags of cement worth of Rs. 2880/-,  which he purchased from M/s Ram Singh & company, got damaged. The said letter was duly received by the OP on 22.12.2017 but no reply was given by it. The sand supplied by OP is lying in the street, in front of building of the complainant, which causes inconvenience to the passerby.  Complainant so far, countless times, collected the sand himself and also so many times hired a worker @ Rs.350/-, to collect the sand. By not picking up the poor quality of sand and by not supplying the good quality of sand, the OP has committed deficiency in service and prayed that present complaint may be allowed and OP may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant and to pay Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses or any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit.

2.       Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and filed written version, raising preliminary objections with regard to time barred etc. On merits, it is stated that the OP is running the business of supply of sand stone, bricks and tiles etc. not any business of tyres. Complainant placed an order for supply of 300 Sq. feet of coarse sand and demanded quality of sand was supplied at the residence of complainant. Complainant accompanied with the loaded truck of sand upto his residence. The house of complainant was situated in a street and it was not possible for the truck to enter in the street, therefore, as per directions of the complainant, the sand was unloaded outside the street near the house of complainant and he paid the remaining amount to the driver. Complainant cannot allege that the sand was dropped at his residence without getting its quality and quantity checked from him. If at all the quality was not good then, he should have raised the objection before the sand was unloaded. Complainant had never approached  the OP with any such complaint that sand  supplied to him was of poor quality or for lifting of the sand supplied to him. The sand which was supplied to the complainant was coarse sand and the same was supplied as per the order of the complainant and was of best quality. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied and OPs prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.

3.                 Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW1/A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-14  and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand, Shri Rajan Chawla, son of Shri Krishan Lal Chawla, Proprietor of M/s Rajan Motors, Chandigarh Road, Near Naraingarh Chowk, Baldev Nagar, Ambala City i.e. OP tendered his affidavit as Annexure OP-A and closed the evidence on behalf of the OP.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file.

5.                The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that complainant placed an order with the OP for supply of coarse sand. The OP supplied the sand on 07.12.2017, in the late evening when it was Pitch-dark. The OP wrongly alleged that complainant accompanied the loaded truck as on that day he was in his office at Mandi Gobindgarh, as is evident from the factory attendance register, Annexure C-8. The sand supplied by the OP was of inferior quality and was not suitable for construction work. Complainant requested the OP to replace the sand and supply the sand which can be used for construction of the building, as is evident from the letter dated 20.12.2017, Annexure C-3, which was sent through registered post and same was delivered to the OP as is evident from the tracking report Annexure C-4, inspite of repeated requests OP did not replace the sand.

6.                On the contrary, the learned counsel for the OP has submitted that the OP supplied the sand as demanded by the complainant and no request was made to replace the sand.

7.                Admittedly, complainant purchased 300 Sq. feet coarse sand from the OPs for a sum of Rs.7,087/-, vide tax invoice dated 07.12.2017, Annexure C-1. From the perusal of letter dated 20.12.2017, Annexure C-3, it is evident that complainant requested the OP for replacement of the sand. From the tracking report, Annexure C-4, it is quite clear that postal authorities delivered the said letter to the OP. Meaning thereby the OP was well aware of the fact that complainant had requested for replacement of the sand supplied to him, as it was not fit for construction. It may be stated here that when complainant requested the OP to replace the sand as the same could not be used for construction, then, proprietor of OP should have paid heed to the request of the complainant and being a good salesman should have replaced the sand with the sand which can be used for construction. By not doing so, OP has committed deficiency in service. Complainant has purchased the sand in question from the OP worth of Rs.7087/-  and he is claiming compensation for the financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses. In the case of Surendra Kumar Tyagi Vs. Jagat Nursing & Hospital & Another, 2010 CPJ 199 (NC), the Hon’ble National Commission has held that compensation should be commensurate with loss and injury suffered by the complainant. The compensation is required to be fair and just and not unreasonable and arbitrary. The consumer fora are not meant to enrich the consumers, at the cost of the service providers, by awarding unfair, unreasonable and highly excessive compensation.  Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration, we are of the view that end of justice would be met, if OP is directed to pay lumpsum amount of Rs.25,000/-, as compensation for financial loss, mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant and litigation expenses. We are also of the view that directions needs to be given to the OP, to lift the sand from the site.

8.                 In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OP to pay lump sum amount of Rs.25,000/-, to the complainant and also lift the sand from the site. OP is further directed to comply with the aforesaid direction, within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Certified copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules.  File be annexed and consigned to the record room.

Announced on :18.04.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                  Member                       President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present:       Sh. Mewa Ram Sounti Advocate, counsel for complainant.

                   Ms. Manisha Bhatnagar, Advocate, counsel for OP.

 

Vide our separate detailed order of even date, the present complaint has been allowed. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.

Announced on :18.04.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)  (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                         Member                       President