D.O.F:05/11/2022
D.O.O:02/09/2024
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD
CC.271/2022
Dated this, the 02nd day of September 2024
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENA. K.G : MEMBER
Shasi Kumar,
S/o Late Kunhiraman,
R/at Pouthamvalappu,
Panayal Post and Village,
Hosdurg Taluk, Kasaragod District : Complainant
(Adv: Sruthi.G.V)
And
Ratnakaran,
S/o O. Andy,
Olippadakkam,
Natakkallu, Ravaneshwaram Post
Bekal, Hosdurg Taluk,
Kasaragod District. : Opposite Party
(Adv: C. Eappen)
ORDER
SMT. BEENA. K.G : MEMBER
The case of the complainant is that he is a coolie worker and Opposite party is carrying on the works of interior decorations and modular kitchen by the name and style ‘R.K ALUMINIUM Decors’. The Opposite party represented to the complainant that he is doing the works of kitchen cabinets at the residents of newly constructed houses and expressed his interest to undertake the complainants new house’s kitchen work at Pouthamvalappu Panayal also will be done by him. After negotiations between complainant and Opposite Party, Opposite Party agreed to carry out modular kitchen work for the complainant for an amount of Rs. 50,000/-. The opposite party informed the complainant that he have no money to purchase the materials to start the work and demanded the entire amount in advance. As both parties are known to each other. The complainant had given the entire amount of Rs. 50,000/- in advance to him on 01/02/2022. The opposite Party further agreed to the complainant that the works of the said modular kitchen could be completed within two weeks. The opposite party had started some initial works of the cabinet, later not turned up nor completed the works despite the laps of about six months. On enquiry the complainant could learn that the opposite party have closed down the shop and evading from the complainant to dupe him for his gain. The complainant tried to meet the opposite party several times and requested to complete the work as agreed. The opposite party with ulterior intentions postponing the work, the lethargic attitude of the opposite party caused huge monitory loss and severe mental agony to the complainant. The complainant caused to send a lawyer notice to the opposite party calling upon him to complete the work of modular kitchen as agreed, but the opposite party sends a false reply to the notice. Therefore the complainant prays for the commission to direct opposite party to complete the work of the modular kitchen at the residence of the complainant and also to pay Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by the complainant or to direct him to refund Rs. 50,000/- with interest to the complainant with cost of litigation.
Notice of opposite party served. The Opposite party appeared and filed counter. According to him all the averments of the complainant are false and hence denied. That the averment in the complaint that opposite party carrying on the works of interior decorations and modular kitchen by name and style R.K ALUMINIUM Decors is false and denied. And the opposite party represented that the works of complainants kitchen at Panayal will be done by him is also utterly false and hence denied. That the averment in the complaint that after negotiations between complainant and opposite party, Opposite party had agreed to carry out modular kitchen work for an amount of Rs. 50,000/- is against truth and hence denied. The averment in the complaint that the opposite party represented to the complainant that he have no money to purchase the material to start the work and demanded him to pay the entire amount in advance is false and hence denied. The opposite party further denies that as the complainant and opposite party and knowing each other and as demanded by opposite party the complainant had given the entire amount of Rs. 50,000/- in advance to him on 01/02/2022 is false and denied. The version in the complaint that the opposite party had further agreed to complete the works of the modular kitchen within two weeks is also false also denied. The Opposite Party admitted that hough the opposite party had started some initial works of the cabinet but later the complainant not corporate with the opposite party to complete the works and the version of the complainant that on enquiry the complainant had learn that the opposite party have closed down the shop and evading from the complainant to dupe him for his gain is against the fact and hence denied. The opposite party in his version totally denied each and every averments stated by the complainant in his complaint.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the documents produced the marked as Ext A1 to A3. Ext A1 copy of lawyer notice issued by complainant, Ext A2 is AD card and Ext A3 is reply notice.
The main question raised for consideration are :-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party in completing the works of the complainant’s modular kitchen at Pothamvalappu?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for relief?
- If so what is the relies?
The allegation of the complainant is that opposite parties agreed to complete the works of his kitchen cabinet for an amount of Rs. 50,000/- after entering into an oral agreement the opposite party informed that he have no money and demanded the entire amount in advance. The complainant had given the entire amount of Rs. 50,000/- in advance on 01/02/2022 and opposite party agreed to complete the works within two weeks. The complainant started the work later not turned up and nor he completed the work even after six months with great difficulty the complainant met him and requested him to complete the work. But he was not ready to complete the work. The grievance of the complainant is that the opposite party collected the entire amount in advance with an offer to complete the work within two weeks, but after the laps of six months also the work is in the initial stage itself and the opposite party is not ready to complete the same. The complainant is caused to send a lawyer notice on 15/09/2022 to opposite party, calling upon him to complete the work. Ext A1 copy of notice is produced by the complaint with AD card as Ext A2. The opposite party sent a false reply to the said notice which is produced as Ext A3.
We carefully gone through the affidavit and documents produced by the complainant and the version filed by opposite party. Ext A1 proves that there is an oral agreement between the complainant and opposite party, and in Ext A3 the opposite party denied all allegation of the complainant but admitted that he had agreed to do the work and started the work.
Even though Opposite party filed version no steps were taken to disprove the case of the complainant either by cross examing the complainant or by examining the other witness. The opposite party prayed time for evidence, but no evidence is adduced. A common men will not come with a false complaint with specific allegations. Moreover the complainant allegations are specific and genuine. In Ext A3 reply notice opposite party admits that he had agreed to do the work and started the work. But not collected any amount from the complainant. Now the opposite party is not doing any work in the name and style R.K ALUMINIUM Decors. He closed the shop and evaded from the work proves gross deficiency in service. Due to the irresponsible act of Opposite party, the complainant had undergone monitory loss and mental agony. Hence the complainant is entitled for relief.
The reliefs sought by the complainant is either to complete the work or to refund the collected amount of Rs. 50,000/- with interest and cost. As the complainant himself stated in his affidavit that now the opposite party is not doing the modular kitchen work, Hence in this situation it is better to refund the collected amount with interest and cost. The complainant entitled to cost of litigation of Rs. 5000/- and also entitled for interest of the amount of Rs. 50,000/- from 01/02/2022 till payment. As the complainant has given Rs. 50,000/- on 01/02/2022 and the work is not completed even after two years he is entitled for a compensation of Rs. 15,000/-.
Therefore, the complaint is allowed directing opposite party to refund Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with 9% interest from 01/02/2022 till payment with a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) and a cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Lawyer Notice
A2- Acknowledgment Card
A3- Reply Notice
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
