Date of Filling : 07.09.2012
Date of Disposal:25.09.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, THIRUVALLUR
PRESENT: THIRU. S.PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M., … PRESIDENT
TMT. S.SUJATHA,B.Sc., … MEMBER-I
CC.20/2012
Tuesday, the 25th day of September 2015
Mr. B.Dhesikan,
No.36, Buddhar Street,
Vetriselvan Anbalagan Nagar,
Chennai - 600 082. …Complainant
/Vs/
Mr.N.Saravanan
S/o Mr.NM.P.Nava pillai,
No.143, Sowbagya Apartments,
Sathyanarayana Street,
Venkatapuram, Ambattur,
Chennai- 600 053. …Opposite Party
….
This Complaint is coming upon before us finally on 15.09.2015 in the
presence Thiru.N.Rajkumar, Advocate on the side of the complainant and the opposite party having been set exparte and upon hearing arguments on the side of the complainant and perused the documents and evidence, this Forum delivered the following,
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY THIRU. S. PANDIAN, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 to direct the opposite parties to repay a sum of Rs.4,95,085/- towards excessively collected amount, to pay Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service and with cost of litigation expenses.
The Brief averments of the complaint as follows:
- The complainant is the owner of the property at No.32A, Ranga Garde,
Kolathur, Chennai – 600 099. The complainant on believing the opposite party’s honey shredded words, the complainant entrusted the construction of his house at the above said property to the opposite party according to a construction agreement which was entered into between both parties on 05.05.2011. The total cost of construction was fixed at Rs.33,86,600/- as the total area of construction was fixed at Rs.1400/-.
2. That, as per the construction agreement, he issued his cheque No.572042 for a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- dated 09.05.2011 drawn on State Bank of India, Manali Branch in favour of the opposite party and was duly credited to his account. Moreover the complainant had also handed over construction materials, so that the complainant spent a huge sum of money.
3. In spite of adhering to the construction agreement dated 05.05.2011, the opposite party violated the same and never abide by the specification as enlisted in page “4” of the construction agreement. Moreover, the complainant himself had good experience in the field of construction, he was able to pin point the flaws in the materials used in the construction and on the quality of work. Though the complainant’s efforts to bring the above to the opposite party’s notice but turned futile. The complainant was totally puzzled by the indifferent attitude of the opposite party and on enquiry, latter on came to know that the opposite party delegated the work to some un qualified person on sub contract.
3. The opposite party had without intimation of the complainant’s knowledge delegated the work to unqualified work force apart from using sub standard materials which clearly reflected in the quality of construction. Hence the complainant, in order to save himself from further damages, instructed opposite party to refrain from further construction. The opposite party also agreed to discontinue the same.
4. The work done by the opposite party inclusive of the labour and material charges comes to only a sum of Rs.4,62,903/- and he has already furnished the details of the same to the opposite party. Hence after duly deducting the sum of Rs.4,62,903/- from the total amount of Rs.9,57,988/- the opposite party now due and liable to pay a sum of Rs.4,95,085/- to the complainant.
5. The opposite party well aware of all the happenings and his negligence, deficiency in service, poor quality of work apart from blatant violations from the said construction Agreement has caused untold mental agony and irreparable hardship to the complainant apart from severe monetary loss. The complainant files all the documents and photographs along with this complaint to prove the deficiency in service committed by the opposite party. Hence the complaint is filed.
6. In spite of more than sufficient time given to the opposite party he did not come forward to file the written version on his side also not chosen to appear and therefore he was set ex-parte. In order to proof the case of the complainant he submitted his proof affidavit as his evidence and Exhibit A1 to A6 are marked.
7. Though the opposite party remained Ex-parte, this Forum decide to this case purely on merits.
8. At this juncture, the vital point of determination before this Forum is:-
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint?
- To what other reliefs, the complainant entitled to?
9. Written arguments filed on the side of the complainant. In addition to that
oral arguments also adduced.
10. Point 1: Regarding this point, on careful perusal of the complaint as well as the proof affidavit, it is learnt that on 05.05.2011 the construction agreement was entered in between the complainant and the opposite party for the construction of house for the complainant to the extent of 2419 sq. feet and the total cost fixed at Rs.33,86,600/- with certain terms and conditions in between them. The said construction agreement is marked as Exhibit A1, In continuation of Exhibit A1, the complainant has paid Rs.8,50,000/- by means of cheque No.572042 on 09.05.2011 which was drawn on State Bank of India, Manali Branch, on the same was duly credited into the account of the opposite party. The bank statement is marked as Exhibit A2. It is further learnt from Exhibit A3 and A4 about the particulars of materials handed over by the complainant to the opposite party. It is pertinent to note from the proof affidavit of the complainant that he himself had good experience in the field of construction and thereby he was able to pinpoint the flaws in the materials used in the construction and the quality of work and on that basis the complainant has clearly found the poor quality of work with un qualified workers done by the opposite party and the complainant had taken several photographs to demonstrate the same to the opposite party. Even then the opposite party never visited the site of construction and thereby the complainant understood that the opposite party delegated the work to some unqualified persons on sub-contract which is totally contrary to the terms of the Exhibit A1, agreement. It is further stated that in the proof affidavit that the opposite party had deliberately and negligently acted upon and thereby grossly violated the terms of Exhibit A1 agreement. In spite of repeated calling by the complainant the opposite party did not respond. Hence the complainant was constrained to issue Exhibit A5, notice to the opposite party and in turn the opposite party has sent Exhibit A6, the reply notice with false facts.
11. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, it is crystal clear that the complainant has proved his case by means of relevant documents and evidence. While so, in spite of liberal and sufficient time given by this Forum, the opposite party has not chosen to appear before this Forum and proceed further. Such kind of attitude of the opposite party and not come forward to produce any contra evidence to rebut the evidence of the complainant, which clearly shows the lethargic act of the opposite party. Therefore, this Court can easily drawn an adverse inference against the opposite party and thereby this Forum concluded that there is a deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Thus the point No.1 is answered accordingly.
12. Point 2: In the light of the conclusion arrived in point No.1, the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the complaint with reasonable compensation and cost. Thus the point no.2 is answered accordingly.
In the result, this complaint is allowed in part. Accordingly, the opposite party
is directed to return the collection of the Excess amount of Rs.4,95,085/- (Rupees Four Lakh Ninety Five Thousand & Eighty Five Only) to the complainant with interest of 9% P.A. from 24.08.2012 to 25.09.2015, the date of this order and to pay a compensation of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) for causing mental agony, due to deficiency of service and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards cost.
The above amount shall be payable within one month from the date of
receipt of the copy of the order, failing which the said amount shall carry interest at the
rate of 9% P.A. till the date of payment.
Dictated by the president to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by her, correctly by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this 25th September 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER I PRESIDENT
List of Documents filed by the complainant
Ex.A1/Dt.06.05.2011: Xerox copy of the construction agreement between the
complainants and the opposite party.
Ex.A2/Dt. : Xerox copy of the Bank statement of the complainant.
Ex.A3/Dt. : Xerox copy of the particulars of materials handed over to the
opposite party
Ex.A4/Dt. : Xerox copy of the Total material spent and payment receipts.
Ex.A5/Dt.29.04.2011: Xerox copy of the legal notice sent by the complainant’s counsel
to the opposite party.
Ex.A6/Dt.31.01.2012: Xerox copy of the reply notice sent by the opposite party’s
counsel to the complainant’s counsel.
List of Documents filed by the opposite party: Nil.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER I PRESIDENT
