Complaint presented on   :   12.07.2013 

                                                                 Order pronounced on      :    30.01.2015   

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,         :      PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,                   :       MEMBER II

FRIDAY THE 30^th DAY OF JANUARY 2015

C.C.NO.44/2014

G.Sridhar,

S/o. Gopalakrishnan,

No.68B Karpagam Nagar, Ponniammanmedu,

Chennai – 110.                                                       … Complainant      

-Vs-S

S.Ravinchandran,

Sole Proprietor,

M/s. Kasthuri Constructions,

No.

Thirumangalam Road, Anna Nagar West,

Chennai -40.                                                           …Opposite party

Date of complaint         :        12.07.2013 

For Complainant               :        Mr. Syed Ismail, Advocate

For Opposite party           :        Exparte

O R D E R

THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, PRESIDENT               

Complaint filed  under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for a direction to the opposite party  to  pay the sum of Rs.7,51,108/- to him towards  the damages and loss sustained with costs of the complaint. 

1. The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:

The complainant is the  owner of the  house and premises bearing no.68B, Karpagam Nagar, Ponniamman Medu, Chennai 110  having  building 800 sq.ft in the ground floor and 400sq.ft in the 1^st floor. The complainant wanted to put up additional construction in the ground floor for 145 sq.ft and in the 1^st floor 435sq.ft  and  to execute the additional construction work he entered into an agreement dated 10.09.2010 with the opposite party fixing cost of construction of Rs.6,23,250/- .  The opposite party commenced the work on 21.10.2010  and he received the payments periodically by making endorsement on the reverse page of the agreement and he totally received a sum of Rs. 8,50,000/- which is more than the agreed amount.   However the opposite party abruptly  stopped the work  and inspite of several request made by the complainant to complete the work the opposite party failed to complete the same and thereby the opposite party committed deficiency in service.  The complainant completed the left over construction on 05.03.2012  at a cost of Rs. 2,51,108/-. Thereafter the complainant caused a legal notice dated 04.04.2013 and for which the opposite party did not reply even after receiving the same on 08.04.2013.  Hence the complainant filed this complaint for claiming a sum of Rs.7,51,108/- as damages  for the loss  sustained to him with cost. 

2.       Though the opposite party appeared through counsel he had not filed the written version inspite of sufficient time given and hence the opposite party was  set exparte on 14.09.2014 for non filing of written version.

3.       The Complainant had filed proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 were  marked  on the side of the complainant. The opposite party remained exparte.

4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1) Whether the opposite party committed deficiency in service?

2) To what relief the complainant is entitled in this complaint?

5. POINT NO: 1

The complainant is the owner of the house and premises bearing no.68B, Karpagam Nagar, Ponniamman Medu, Chennai 110 and the existing house 800sq.ft in the ground floor,400sq.ft in the 1^st floor, the complainant wanted to put up additional construction of 145 sq.ft in the ground floor and 435sq.ft in the 1^st floor and to execute the additional construction he entered into an Ex.A1 agreement with the opposite party at construction costs, of Rs.6,23,250/- including material costs the opposite party commenced  the work on 21.10.2010 and after periodically receiving payment totaling to Rs.8,50,000/- and thereafter he abruptly stopped the work from 08.05.2011 inspite of several requests  the  opposite party not turned up to complete the work. 

6.       Ex.A1 is the agreement entered between the  complainant and the opposite party. In the said agreement it is mentioned that the construction has  to be completed within  4 to 5 months from the date of commencing the work. The work was started on 21.10.2010. The opposite party received the periodical amounts by making necessary entries on the reverse pages of the Ex.A1 and accordingly he received the last payment on 08.05.2011.  As agreed the opposite party had not completed the work within 4 to 5 months  and also failed to complete the work even after request made by the complainant and therefore  it is held that  the opposite party committed deficiency in service. 

7. POINT NO: 2

According to the complainant  he engaged a private contractor and completed the left over work by the opposite party  by spending a sum of Rs.1,88,188/-  as material costs and Rs.62,920/- towards labour charges. Ex.A2 series is the bills for purchase of the materials and as per the bills  the material costs comes to Rs.1,11,728/-. Ex.A3 series is the receipts for payment of labour which comes to Rs.76,420/-.  The complainant claimed for  mental torture Rs.5,00,000/- and in all claimed  total damages for a sum of Rs.7,51,108/-.   The opposite party entered the agreement to complete the additional construction at a cost of Rs.6,23,250/-  as per Ex.A1 agreement.  In the very same agreement after endorsing several dates he received a total sum of Rs. 8,50,000/- towards construction.  The opposite party actually received excess amount a sum of Rs.2,33,250/- besides agreed amount of Rs.6,23,250/-in Ex.A1.  Further the opposite party have not completed the construction as per agreement Ex.A1 even after receipt of excess amount. The excess amount  paid is Rs.2,33,250/-, material costs of Rs.1,11,728/-  as per Ex.A2 and labour charges of Rs.76,420/- as per Ex.A3 i.e. totaling the  amount comes to a sum of  Rs.4,21,398/- is  a loss to the complainant.   Apart from that the opposite party also have not completed the construction within the agreed period and for which the complainant as  suffered with mental agony and pain for which he is entitled for compensation and such  a compensation can be fixed a sum of Rs.1 lakh.  So in all it would be appropriate to order  a sum of Rs.5,21,398/- as compensation  to the complainant in all respects as stated above payable by the opposite party would meet  ends of justice and accordingly this points is answered. 

8.       In the result, the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,21,398/- (Rs. Five lakhs twenty one thousand three ninety eight only) as compensation to the complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rs. Two thousand only) as cost of the complaint. The opposite party is directed to pay the above amounts  within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which the compensation amount shall carry with interest at the rate of 9%  per annum  till the date of payment.

Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 30^th day of January 2015.

        MEMBER-II                                                               PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENT:

                                     - NIL - 

             MEMBER-II                                                             PRESIDENT