Haryana

Karnal

CC/437/2021

Sulekh Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Ramesh Kumar - Opp.Party(s)

Gurvinder Pal Singh

28 May 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No. 437 of 2021

                                                        Date of instt.31.08.2021

                                                        Date of Decision:28.05.2024

 

Sulekh Chand son of Shri Kalu Ram, resident of village Badarpur, tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

 

                                                                        …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Ramesh Kumar son of Jarnail Singh, resident of village Hansu Majra, near Chaugama, tehsil Indri, District Karnal M-70181-76983.
2. Akshay Kumar son of Shri Karan Singh, resident of village Rajepur, tehsil Indri, District Karnal.

 

                                                                   …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.      

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr.  Suman Singh…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri G.P. Singh, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri  Ashok Kumar, counsel for the OPs.

 

                     (Dr. Suman Singh, Member)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant wanted to construct his house at village Badarpur, tehsil Indri, District Karnal for which he approached the OPs. After negotiation the following works of construction were also agreed to be done by the OPs:-

1. Ground floor, Plaster, work of Double tiles.
2. Boundary, Lintel, as per the site plan.

The rate for doing the abovesaid works was agreed at Rs.165/- per ft. An agreement dated 18.05.2021 was executed between the complainant and the OP no.1 in this regard, which was written by document writer Mai Chand, Indri, District Karnal and the same was duly entered in his register at Sr. no.337 dated 18.05.2021. The contents of the abovesaid agreement were duly readover to the complainant as well as the OP no.1 and after accepting the same to be true and correct, the OP no.1 as well as the complainant put their signatures over the same. The said agreement was also duly signed by two witnesses. Vide the said agreement, it was agreed that after the commencement of work, the OPs will not leave the work midway and the measurement will be done from lintel. He further agreed that old bricks and Saria will be used in the construction work. It was also agreed that the OP no.1 will bear the expenses of loading and unloading, the works of Tarai, Rora Kutai and shuttering. It was also agreed that the expenses towards applying tape and black oil on shuttering and rent of shuttering will be borne by the OP no.1 and the OPs will also construct slabs in the Almirah and windows of bedrooms. It was also agreed that on the filling of foundation, the complainant shall pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- to the OPs and further shall pay the amount from time to time as per their need. It was also agreed that the OPs will construct the house as per site plan. The OPs filled up the foundation of the property of the complainant and on 24.05.2021 the complainant paid an amount of Rs.40,000/- to the OP no.1. The complainant paid Rs.40,000/-on 07.06.2021, Rs.20,000/- on 21.06.2021 and Rs.40,000/- on 07.07.2021 to the OPs and in this way, the OPs received a total sum of Rs.1,40,000/- from the complainant. However, after receiving the abovesaid amount from the complainant, the OPs stopped the construction work of the house of the complainant by making lame excuses. As per the terms and conditions of the abovesaid agreement, the OPs are legally bound to do the works as have been enumerated in the agreement dated 18.05.2021. Thereafter, complainant requested the OPs several times to complete the construction work as per agreement but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of complainant. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 19.07.2021 to the OPs but it also did not yield any result. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the OP no.1 filed an application before the Labour Inspector, Karnal for recovery of his wages in which the complainant has been duly served but he has not put up his appearance in that proceedings and filed this false and baseless complaint. The OP no.1 has not entered into any kind of alleged agreement with the complainant. The complainant played a fraud upon the OP no.1 and prepared the alleged agreement as the OP no.1 is not qualified person and is doing the labour work for construction as meson with other labourers and the complainant approached and instigated the OP no.1 to do work with fixed rate in place of daily wages and promised to pay the labour to the OPs and other labourers and after settlement of their daily wages, the construction work was started by the OPs. But lateron the complainant become dishonest and forced the OP no.1 to sign on some papers, which were lateron reduced into the alleged agreement. Rather the OP no.1 was not aware of the contents of the alleged agreement and when the complainant had stopped to pay the arrears of wages amounting to Rs.60000/- to the OPs then he moved a complaint to the S.P. Karnal on 12.07.2021. But due to influence of the complainant the police has not taken any action against the complainant. The legal notice was duly replied by the OPs but instead of considering the reply of legal notice, complainant has filed the present false and baseless complaint against the OPs. The complainant had got done the construction work from OPs and other labourers as per his convenience and not as per the agreement as alleged because no such agreement was arrived at between the parties. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of Agreement dated 18.05.2021, photographs Ex.C2 and Ex.C3, copy of legal notice Ex.C4, postal receipt Ex.C5 and closed the evidence on 27.09.2022 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, OPs have tendered into evidence affidavit of Ramesh Kumar Ex.OP1/A, copy of complaint to SP Ex.OP1, copy of application dated 07.07.2021 to SHO, Thana Indri, District Karnal Ex.OP2, copy of application to Labour Inspector Ex.OP3,  copy of application dated 10.07.2021  to Police Chowki Incharge, Biana, District Karnal Ex.OP4, copy of Add. General Diary Details dated 11.07.2021 Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on 11.10.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant wanted to construct his house  for which he approached the OPs and construction work were also agreed to be done by the OPs. The rate for doing the works was agreed at Rs.165/- per ft.  and in this regard an agreement dated 18.05.2021 was executed between the parties. As per agreement, the OPs will not leave the work midway and the measurement will be done from lintel. The OPs received a total sum of Rs.1,40,000/- from the complainant and after receiving the said amount, the OPs stopped the construction work. Complainant requested the OPs several times to complete the construction work as per agreement but OPs did not pay any attention to the request of complainant and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that no such agreement was arrived at between the parties as alleged by the complainant. OPs moved an application before the Labour Inspector, Karnal for recovery of his wages in which the complainant has been duly served but he has not put up his appearance in those proceedings and filed this false and baseless complaint. The complainant become dishonest and forced the OP no.1 to sign some papers, which were lateron reduced into the alleged agreement. Rather the OP no.1 was not aware of the contents of the alleged agreement and when complainant had stopped paying the arrears of wages amounting to Rs.60000/- to the OPs then he made complaint to the S.P. Karnal on 12.07.2021. The complainant has got done the construction work from OPs and other labourers as per his convenience and not as per the agreement as alleged because no such agreement was arrived at between the parties and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Complainant has alleged that OPs have not completed the construction work as per agreement executed between the parties and stopped the same in midway. The onus to prove his version was relied upon the complainant but he has miserably failed to prove his version by leading any cogent and convincing evidence. The complainant relied upon the photographs Ex.C2 and Ex.C3 but on the said photographs no date, month and year has been mentioned. Hence, without the date, month and year, it cannot be ascertained when the said photographs were taken. Thus, the said photographs are not admissible in the eyes of law. The complainant has relied upon the agreement Ex.C1 but the same is denied by the OPs. The said agreement is only a photocopy, which has no weightage in the eyes of law. Furthermore, complainant has not examined the witnesses as mentioned in the agreement. Rather, OPs have placed on file copy of application Ex.OP2 dated 07.07.2021 moved by Ramesh Kumar (OP) to SHO, Thana Indri, District Karnal against the complainant and his sons. OPs further relied upon the application of complainant Ex.OP4 dated 10.07.2021 to Police Chowki Incharge, Biana, District Karnal wherein complainant himself has requested the Police Incharge for a chance to be given to him. OPs have already filed an application before the Labour Inspector regarding the recovery of his wages. Hence, in view of the above, it is not clear whether the amount is pending against the complainant or the OP.

11.           Thus, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
Dated: 28.05.2024 

  President,       

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

                  (Vineet Kaushik)              (Dr. Suman Singh)

                        Member                          Member