1. JIMMY KORAH 2. K.Anirudhan 3. Smt;Shajitha Beevi
Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
ORDER
SRI.K.ANIRUDHAN (MEMBER) Sri. Satheesan, the complainant has filed the complaint before this forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The contentions of the complaint is as follows: - The complainant has entered into an agreement on 19-10-2004 with the opposite party to construct a residential building for the complainant as per the plan, for a total cost of Rs. 4,90,000/-. As per the agreement, the opposite party has to complete the work of the residential building and will hand over to the complainant within the period i.e. before 30-04-2005. It is contented that the opposite party has handed over the residential building after 4 months from the agreed period, to the complainant. It is further contended that after one year, major portions of the wall and roof of the building are effected cracks and it became defective due to leakage of water. In addition to the above defects, the use of bricks for the construction of Wash Basin and Bathrooms are quite different from the conditions in the agreement. Construction of bathroom lies on the outside area of the building which is also different from the plan of the building. Noting the above defects, the complainant requested the opposite party in several times to rectify the same. But the opposite party has not turned up. Since the complainant has not obtained a positive step to cure the defects noted in the building parts, from the opposite party, the complainant has filed the complaint seeking relief, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. 2. Notice was sent to the opposite party. He entered appearance before this forum and filed version. In the version, it is stated that the complainant has not approached the opposite party for the construction of building and the agreement was renewed out of love and affection, and agreed to construct the building for Rs. 4,90,000/-. It is stated that the opposite party has not received the above said amount, and delay was due to the non-payment of agreed amount. It is further stated that the toilet building was constructed outside the building was with the consent of the complainant, and denied the allegation of alteration of building plan, and denied the charge of cracks in the wall and roof portion of the building. It is stated that in every stage of the constructions, the attention of the complainant was there in mixing of cement and other allied items for the construction. The construction of wall as per the agreement and has agreed that the Bathroom was constructed outside the building as per the request of the opposite party. It is stated that the complainant had not informed any of the defects of the building to the opposite party and not requested to rectify the same. 3. Considering the rival contentions of the parties, this forum raised the issue (1) Whether there is any deficiency in service the part of the opposite party? (2) Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensations and costs from the opposite party? 4. Issue No.1: On the side of the complainant he has produced 2 documents marked as Ext. A1 and A2. Ext. A1 is the agreement dated 19-10-2004 executed by the opposite party in favour of the complainant. It shows the actual consideration amount was Rs. 4,90,000/- for the entire construction of the such building. It shows the conditions and period of completion i.e. on or before 30-04-2005. The deed also shows that the toilet room is inside the building. But it was constructed outside the building. Commissioner was appointed to ascertain the defects in the walls and roof portions. Commissioner has filed the report Ext. C1 stating that there is cracks on the cement plastering in the walls, and there is vetting at 30 x 30 cm size in the RCC roof and it requires replastering. The report further stated that there are cracks of plastering in all rooms, and there are cracks near the Air hole. The report as a whole stated that there are defects and short comings in the work done by the opposite party. Considering the above aspects, we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in the construction of the residential building. The first issue is found in favour of the complainant. 5. Issue No.2:- Since there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant is entitled to get compensation and costs from the opposite party. Second issue is also found in favour of the complainant. So in view of the above said discussion, it is clear that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party in constructions of the residential building by way of delay of completion of construction, defective construction, deviation of plan in constructions of bath rooms etc. Hence the complaint is to be allowed. In the result, we direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 90,000/- as prayed for, as compensation, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for negligence of the opposite party and a sum of Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the complainant. We further direct the opposite party to pay the above said amount to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Complaint allowed. Pronounced in open Forum on this the 13th day of June, 2008. Sd/- SRI.K. ANIRUDHAN: Sd/- SRI. JIMMY KORAH: Sd/- SMT.N.SHAJITHA BEEVI: APPENDIX:- Evidence of the Complainant:- Ext. A1 - Photocopy of the agreement deed dtd. 19-10-04. Ext. A2 - Photocopy of the plan Ext. C1 - Commission Report submitted by Raveendran Nair Evidence of the opposite party: NIL // True Copy // By Order Senior Superintendent To Complainant/Opposite Party/SF Typed by: Sh/- Compd by:
