Haryana

Sonipat

484/2013

RAJESH S/O SUKHBIR SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

SATYAWAN S/O CHATTAR SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

PARVEEN KUMAR SHARMA

19 Nov 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SONEPAT.

 

                                Complaint No.484 of 2013

                                Instituted on:28.11.2013

                                Date of order:03.12.2015

 

Rajesh son of Sukhbir Singh, r/o Saraswati Vihar, Mehlana road, Sonepat.  

                                           ...Complainant.

 

                        Versus

 

Satyawan son of Chattar Singh (Carpenter) resident of village Garhi Sarai, Panipat road, Gohana, tehsil Gohana, distt. Sonepat.

 

                                           ...Respondent.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. PK Sharma Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Ashok Rohila, Adv. for respondent.

          

BEFORE-  NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

        SMT.PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

        D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that in the year 2012, the complainant constructed his house and the respondent approached the complainant and offered his services to the complainant for preparing wooden doors and windows and the rate was fixed between the respondent & complainant Rs.170/- per sq. feet and the complainant has paid Rs.65000/- to the complainant as advance. But despite this, the respondent has not started the work. When the complainant approached the respondent, he told that he could not start the work due to some problem and he demanded some more  and the complainant also gave Rs.15000/- to the respondent.  But inspite of receiving Rs.80,000/- from the complainant, the respondent flatly refused to start the work or to return the advance money and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that the respondent never met to the complainant and he never offered his services to the complainant.  The respondent never received any amount what to talk about Rs.65000/- or Rs.15000/- from the complainant.  So, in this way, the respondent has denied every allegation of the complainant and has prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the respondent even after receiving Rs.80000/- from the complainant, has not started the work of preparing the wooden doors and windows and he has also refused to return the aforesaid amount to the complainant.

          Ld. Counsel for the respondent on the basis of the written statement has denied each and every allegation of the complainant.

          But in our view, by doing so, the respondent cannot escape from his legal liabilities.  Ex.CW1/B is the legal notice dated 25.10.2013 which was sent by the complainant to the respondent.  In our view, no man of comman sense allege any allegation against any person unless and until there is some truth in his favour.  If the respondent was fair on his part, then why on receipt of the legal notice from the complainant, the respondent has not taken any action against the complainant. So, in our view, there is something wrong on the part of the respondent and even after receiving huge amount of Rs.80,000/- from the complainant, non-providing the services, definitely amounts to a deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

          The complainant by way of present complaint has sought the relief to direct the respondent to return the amount of Rs.80,000/- alongwith interest and compensation.  In our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if the respondent is given direction to refund Rs.35000/- to the complainant. Thus, we hereby direct the respondent to refund Rs.35000/- (Rs.thirty five thousand) to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of passing of this order, failing which, the above said amount shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till its realization.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)    (DV Rathi) (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF    Member DCDRF     DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 03.12.2015