D.O.F:13/04/2022
D.O.O:28/10/2022
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD
CC.No.66/2022
Dated this, the 28th day of October 2022
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
The Secretary
Trikaripur Gramapanchayath
P.O Trikaripur, Trikaripur Village : Complainant
Hosdurg Taluk, Kasaragod District Pin 671310
(Adv: M. Gangadharan Nair)
And
Smt. Drishya C.H,
Proprietor, M/S Ovonic
1st floor, Vijaya Bank Building : Opposite Party
New Mahe, Kannur – Pin 673311
ORDER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
The brief facts of the case in this complaint is that the complainant is the secretary of Thrikaripur Grama Panchayath, a local body formed under section four of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act 1994. The Thrikaripur Grama Panchayath had included a project bearing No: 23/19 for installing Mini Mast street lights at various places of Thrikaripur Grama Panchayath in its annual plan for 2018-19. The places where the Mini Mast lights are to be installed is decided by the Grama Panchayath vide its decision No:6/247 (1) 2018 Dated 03/12/2018. The secretary was the implementing officer of the project. The project envisaged its execution through a tender process. The complainant invited competitive tenders for execution of the work wide e tender notification. The Opposite party participated in E- tender and submitter her tender. From among the tenders received in response to the notification the e- tender submitted by the Opposite party was accepted by the Grama Panchayath vide it’s decision No: 1(1) 2019 dt: 20/02/2019. The said work of installation of Mini Mast lights involved supply of lamps, poles and other material and its proper installation in the predetermined sites. The complainant issued intimation of acceptance of tender to the Opposite party vide letter No: SC 2 /112-/2018 Dated 21/02/2019. The Opposite party executed the agreement on 25/02/2019 with the complainant and commenced the execution of the said work. The Opposite party failed to complete work successfully before 31/03/2019 as per agreement. Therefore the project had to be included as spill over for the year 2019/2020 as project No: 145/2020. The Opposite party completed the work by 31st January 2020 several of the lights installed by the Opposite party have not been working since September 2021. The complainant brought these facts to the attention of the Opposite party on several occasions. But the Opposite party failed to respond without showing any reason therefore on 13/01/2022 complainant caused to sent a letter to the Opposite party by registered post requesting her to take urgent steps for repair or replacement of defective Mini Mast light. But the Opposite party has deliberately gone back from fulfilling the promising of repairing /replacing the defective parts during warranty period agreed by her in the Ext A6 agreement executed by her. So the Mini Mast light installed has turned useless. About 15 out of 23 lights installed by the Opposite party are not functioning. It has caused vide spread complaint from the beneficiary public. Due to the complaints the entire expenditure of Rs.1985176/- become waste. The omission on the part of Opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice, because of the illegal acts of Opposite party the complainant suffered severe mental agony., inconvenience and financial loss and worth Rs. 1985176/-. Hence the complainant praying for a direction against Opposite party to replacement warranty execution of AMC(Annual maintenance contract) on expiry of the warranty period with a compensation of Rs. 4, 50,000/- with cost of this proceedings.
The complainant filed an IA 105/2022 to issue an emergent advocate commission to not and report the points set out in the work memo. Adv:C. Krishna Kumar from Kasaragod bar is appointed as the commissioner to answer the points set out in the work memo. The commissioner inspected the sites on 06/05/2022 at 7.30Pm and report is filed on 30/05/2022.
Notice of Opposite party served but she remained absent the name of Opposite party called absent and set exparte. The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and the documents produced are marked as Ext A1 to A9. The Commission report is marked as Ext C1 . The issues raised for the consideration are
- Whether there is latches/deficiency of the service on the part of the Opposite party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation
- If so what is the reliefs.
The gist of this complainant is that Thrikaripur Grama Panchayath included a project for installing mini mast street light at various places in its annual plan for 2018 to 2019 . the grama panchayath invited the tenders for execution of work and the Opposite party also participated in the tender and submitted it before Grama Panchayath. The said work of installation includes supply of lamps, poles and other materials and its proper installation in re determined sites. Even though the agreement is signed for the execution of the said work Opposite party failed to complete the said work before 31/03/2019. Moreover the several of the lights installed by the Opposite party had not been working since September 2021. The Opposite party has gone back from her fulfilling for promise of repairing/replacing the defective parts during warranty period as agreed by her in agreement.
The documents produced by the complainant are Ext A1 to A9. Ext A1 is the decision taken on 3/12/2018 to install high mast lights, Ext A2 is the E tender advertisement, Ext A3 is the E tendering system of Government of Kerala, Ext A4 is the copy of the minutes sanctioning the tender, Ext A5 is the copy of the sanction letter from the complainant to Opposite Party , Ext A6 is the agreement entered into between complainant and Opposite Party , Ext A7 is the contingency bill, Ext A8 is the letter from complainant to Opposite Party requesting for repair of light, Ext A9 is the postal acknowledgment. The complainant has produced Ext A1 to A9 to prove his case. The Thrikaripur Grama Panchayath has decided in their board meeting to establish Mini Mast light in certain sites and tender is invited for the work. The Opposite Party submitted her tender which is accepted by the board the sanction is informed to Opposite Party through Ext A5. The complainant and Opposite Party entered into an agreement as Ext A6. But Opposite Party failed to comply the condition mentioned in Ext A6. The complainant informed Opposite Party to repair or replace the damaged lights through Ext A8 letter. The letter is served to Opposite Party and the postal acknowledgment is produced as Ext A9. The allegation of the complainant is that Opposite Party failed to comply the terms and condition mentioned in Ext A6. Due to the deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party the complainant under gone huge loss and serious mental agony due to serious complaint from the side of the public against the Grama panchayth. The complainant who is working as the secretary of Thrikaripur Grama Panchayth is bound to answer the complaints of the public .
In the absence of contra evidence the commission carefully gone through the affidavit and documents submitted by the complainant. According to the commission report Ext C1 the commissioner noted that Mini Mast lights automatically start its function in between sunset and sunrise with the help of timer Seiral No.6,9,18,21(Such as Edattummal Junction, Kakkunnam Junction, Vayalodpalam Near Bericheri gate) in the above schedule where in which timer not working properly hence all lights seen not working more over on enquiry people of the locality reveals before the Commissioner that due to failure of timer they were constrained to open the KSEB meter box for switching on the Mini Mast light manually and the commissioner is on the opinion that such act from the side of the locals for the necessity of lights will cause danger for their life.
Even though serial No, 6,9,2 were annually adjusted but not working and remaining item No.18 partially working out of 4 bulbs one bulb is blinking frequently which will create difficulties for drove vehicle as well as pedestrians. Out of the 23 Mini mast lights only 9 are working properly at the time of inspection.
On the basis of Ext C1 report the commission holds that there is serious deficiency of service and latches on the part of Opposite Party which caused huge loss and mental agony to the complainant. The loss and agony undergone by the complainant has to be compensated the terms of money. Opposite Party is bound to compensate the same. Hence complaint is allowed directing Opposite Party to refund Rs. 4,50,000/- with compensation and cost.
Therefore the complaint is allowed directing Opposite Party to refund Rs. 4,50,000/- with a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) along with cost of Rs. 5000/-. (Rupees Five thousand only)
The time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of the copy of the judgement.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1- Panchayath decision Dt: 03/12/2018
A2- E- tender advertising
A3- e tendering system Government of Kerala.
A4- Panchayath decision Dt: 20/02/2019
A5- Sanction letter
A6- Agreement Dt: 25/02/2019
A7- Contingency bill
A8- A letter Dt: 13/01/2022
A9- Postal Acknowledgment Card
C1- Commission report
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
