CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOTTAYAM.
Present
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member
CC No 71/12
Wednesday the 20th day of June, 2012
Petitioner : K.J. John,
Kalappurackal,
Vanchimala PO
Pin 686 508.
Vs.
Opposite party : Rathesh K.R
Bengalavuparampil
Madukkakkunnu PO 686577
Aavanni Painting works
Elikulam.
ORDER
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member
The complainant’s case is as follows.
The complainant entrusted painting work to the opposite party at the rate Rs.425/- and the opposite party promised to complete the said work within 10 days. The opposite party agreed to give 10 years guarantee for his leak proof work and estimated the expense as Rs.56,000/-. The opposite party stated that he will get painting materials at wholesale rate and the same will be included in the aforementioned amount of Rs.56,000/-. On 1st October he started the work. But after some days, the opposite party issued a bill of Rs.23,400 for the leak proof works against his oral agreement of total expense amount of Rs.56,000/-. According to the complainant he spent Rs.94,750 and the work is not yet completed. The opposite party again demanded Rs.10,500/-. Even after the leak proof work, there is leak and the opposite party is not ready to give any guarantee to the work done by him.
Notice was sent to the opposite party but as he refused to receive the same, he was set expartee.
Points for consideration are:
i) Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party?
ii) Reliefs and costs?
Evidence consists of deposition of the complainant and exhibits A1 to A3
Point No.1
The complainant deposed that the opposite party agreed to do the painting and leak proof work for an amount of Rs.56,000/-. The complainant further deposed that he had to spent more than Rs.96,000/- for the said work. It was next deposed that the opposite party collected an excessive amount of Rs.15,000/- for the purchase of the materials of the said work. Evidencing the excess amount collected, he had produced documents and they are marked as Ext.A1 series, A2 series& A3 series. The complainant alleged that the opposite party collected excessive amounts in different heads and the work done by him is not completed or satisfactory. As the opposite party chose not to contest, the allegations and averments of the complainant against the opposite parties remain unchallenged. From the evidence on record we feel that the opposite party is deficient in their service. Point no.1 is found accordingly.
Point No.2
In view of the findings in point no.1, the complaint is allowed.
The opposite party is ordered to complete the leak proof works and painting work to the complainant’s satisfaction. The opposite party is also ordered to pay the excess amount of Rs.14,400/- collected by him to the complainant along with litigation cost of Rs.500/-. The opposite party is directed to return the articles such as brush, putty, blades, tins, paint etc if any retained by him.
This order is to be complied with within one month of receipt of the copy of the order.
Smt. Bindhu M.Thomas, Member Sd/-
Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P. President Sd/-
Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/-
Appendix
Documents of petitioner
Ext.A1-series copy of bills
Ext.A2-copy of statement
Ext.A3-series copy of statement
Documents of opposite party
Nil
By Order,
Senior Superintendent.
