Kerala

Wayanad

CC/166/2013

T.Asharaf,S/O Mammu,Thacharamban House, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Selvan or Selvaraj,Industrial worker, - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jan 2014

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/166/2013
 
1. T.Asharaf,S/O Mammu,Thacharamban House,
Kalpetta P.O
Wayanad
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Selvan@Selvaraj,Industrial worker,
Kalpetta P.O
Wayanad
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

By Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:

The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order to direct the Opposite Party to pay Rs. 18,500/- as material and labour cost and Rs.3,000/- as refitting cost, Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as lawyer notice charge.

 

2. The Complainant's case in brief:- The Complainant entrusted the Opposite Party a sum of Rs.12,000/- as material cost and Rs. 6,500/- as labour charge for fixing Iron gate in his house, since the Opposite Party is an industrial worker at Kalpetta. The Opposite Party fixed gate but due to the construction defect, the gate was useless. The Complainant informed this to the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party came to the house of Complainant and tried to cure the defect. But it was in vain. Thereafter the Complainant took the gate to the industry of Opposite Party. Thereafter the gate was seen kept in road side of Opposite Party's industry subject to rust. After that the Opposite Party on a repeated demands from the Complainant refixed the gate by making alteration in the concrete beams and gate. Again the gate seems useless. Thereafter also the Opposite Party hesitated to cure the defect and to refix the gate. So there is deficiency of service on the part of

Opposite Party causing great financial and mental agony to the Complainant . Hence this Complaint.

 

3. On admission of complaint, notice was send to the Opposite Party on 13.09.2013 and served on 06.09.2013. Opposite Party appeared in person and sought time for settlement. Thereafter, the Opposite Party did not appear before the Forum and Opposite Party was set-exparty on 25.11.2013. The Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced documents. The Complainant is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A8 is marked. Ext.A5 is marked as series that is 18 in numbers.

 

4. On persusal of complaint and documents, following points are found for

consideration.

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party?

2. What order as to cost and compensation?

 

5. Point No.1 :- To prove the case of the complaint, the complainant produced Ext.A1 to A8. Ext.A1 is the copy of lawyer notice send by the Complainant to Opposite Party Ext.A2 and A3 are the acknowledgment card and postal receipt. Ext.A4 is the receipt for Rs.4,000/- and Ext.A5 series are the photo prints and Ext.A6 is the cash bill. Ext.A7 is the CD. Ext.A8 is the estimate of Assistant Engineer. Ext.A1 to A8 clearly proves the case of the Complainant. The Opposite Party did not respond to the lawyer notice issued to him by the Complainant. More over the Opposite Party initially appeared before the Forum and sought time the settlement. But thereafter not appeared before the Forum and not settled the matter. Even if sufficient time in granted to the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party did not make use of it to settle the matter. So the Forum found that there is clear latches on the part of Opposite Party which causes deficiency of service on his part. So deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party is proved beyond doubt. So the Forum allowed the 1st and 2nd prayers fully and allowed Rs. 5,000/- as compensation (3rd prayer) and Rs.500/- as lawyer notice charge ( 4th prayer). Point No.1 and 2 is found accordingly.

 

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Party is directed to pay altogether Rs.32,000/- (Rupees Thirty Two thousand ) only to the Complainant within 30 days of receipt of this order thereafter the Complainant is entitled for an interest @ 10% per annum. On complying the order the Opposite Party can take back the gate already fixed.

 

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 23rd day of January 2014.

 

Date of filing:26.08.2013

 

 

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True copy/

Sd/

 

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.

 

A P P E N D I X

 

Witnesses for the Complainant:

 

Nil.

 

Witnesses for the Opposite Party:

 

Nil.

 

Exhibits for the Complainant:

 

A1. Lawyer notice dt:25.08.2012.

A2. Postal Receipt. dt:04.09.2012.

A3. Acknowledgement

A4. Receipt. dt:06.05.2013.

A5 series. (18 in Nos) Photo

A6. Cash bill. dt:10.12.2013.

A7. CD

A8. Estimate.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:

Nil.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renimol Mathew]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.