KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

                     VAZHUTHACAUDTHIRUVANANTHAPURAM      

                                                 APPEAL NO.487/10

                             JUDGMENT DATED 27.9.2010

PRESENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU            --  PRESIDENT

SRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR                     --  MEMBER                                                                                                              

Gopidasan

S/0 late Kunjamma Ammal,

Chekkoth house, Thiruvazhiyodu Post,             --  APPELLANT

Ottapalam Taluk,

Palakkad Dt.

   (By Adv.K.Dhanajayan)

                    Vs.

Ramakrishnan,

S/0 late Sankaran Nair,

Lakshmi Krishna House,                                    --  RESPONDENT

Kurthi Nagar, Thottakkara,

Ottapalam.

                                            JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT

          The appellant is the opposite party who is under orders to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-  as  compensation and Rs.1000/- as costs.

          2. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party had agreed to erect concrete rings in the well.  After inspection of the well, it was informed that 14 rings are to be erected.  The amount was fixed at Rs.15,400/-.  The complainant paid Rs.10,000/- and  subsequently, Rs.1,500/- by cheques.  During the work, opposite party demanded higher amount.  The complainant  paid Rs.1,800/- .   

The opposite party inserted 8 rings.  He did not do the work properly.  The rings inserted slipped towards one side and fell into the well.  The same was occasioned on account of the defect in the works executed.  The request of the complainant to rectify the defects went unheeded.      The complainant in order  to complete the work would require an amount of  Rs.9000/-. He has claimed also  a sum of Rs. 5000/- as compensation.

          3. The case of the opposite parties/appellant is that the complainant made him believe that the well is having a depth of 17-18 kole and that there is no   rock under neath.  The well was filled with soil.  The complainant had also told that labour charges will have to be paid in addition.   While removing the soil the rings stipped down and settled on the sloppy rock. The complainant became violent and directed  the opposite party to leave the place.  Thereafter, a mediation   was conducted and complainant agreed to pay Rs.6,000/- for completing the work.  But the complainant did not allow him to complete the work.

          4. The evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavits filed by both sides and Exts.A1 to A4. 

          5. On a perusal of the order it appears that the appellant did not complete the work undertaken.  Being an expert engaged in such works, it is for the appellant to fix the amounts exactly.  Evidently, the appellant has left the work after executing it in part    in a defective manner.

          6. In the circumstances, we find that there is scope for admitting the appeal.  Hence the appeal is dismissed in limine.

          Office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum urgently.

JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT

 S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR --  MEMBER

S/L