Date of Complaint : 13.06.2013
Date of Order :19.02.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT : THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, M.A.M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT.K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER II
C.C.No.192/2013
THIS THURSDAY , THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015
1. R. Saradha,
W/o. A.B. Krishnan.
2. K. Parthasarathy,
S/o. A.B. Krishnan.
3. K.Saravanan,
S/o. A.B. Krishnan.
All are residing at Plot No.52-A,
Door No.6/5,
Amaichar Govindasamy Nagar, III Street,
Kandhachavadi,
Chennai 600 096. .. Complainants.
- Vs-
SNR Flats, Rep. by its Proprietor, L.Navarathanmal Jain, 24 (Old No.10), Jagadeeswaran Street, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017. ..Opposite party. | | .. Opposite party. |
| | |
For the complainant : M/s. S. Ratnakaran & other
For the opposite party : M/s. A.Anbarasu (Exparte)
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to the opposite party to provide with teak wood for main doors, to replace the toilet closets and plumbing materials like taps and showers with branded and the choice of the complainants, to provide wardrobe, replace the electrical wiring and switches with the brands of the complainants choice, to repaint the walls both interior and exterior, etc. or in the alternative to allow the complaints to make the repairs and direct the opposite party to bear the costs of such works and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation and mental agony with cost of this proceedings to the complainants.
ORDER
THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM, PRESIDENT
1. The Case of the complainant is briefly as follows:
The complainants together own the property in Door No.6/5 Amaichar Govindasamy Nagar 3rd Street, Kandhachavadi, Chennai measuring to an extent of 4,4,37 sq. ft. The opposite party projected himself as a builder of repute and had convinced that he would improve the property by entering into joint venture agreement and construct flats in the said property. Accordingly to the said joint venture and development agreement the opposite party was to build 10 flats in the said property. The opposite party handed over possession of the complainants share of three flats on 11.9.2011. However the complainant were shocked to see the flats in an appalling condition. The construction were defects are as follows:
a)The main doors were not made out of the material as promised
b) The toilet closets and plumbing materials like taps and showers
were not in the brand as promised.
c) The wardrobe was not put up as promised.
d) The electrical wiring and switches are not up to the standard
design and brands. The wirings and switch boards have come off
the walls and the switches broken down.
e) The painting to the walls were in-complete – the internal walls
were not coated with two coats of putty. Only wall primer has
been painted.
f) The external wall paintings are incomplete.
g) The fans, switch boards and mains were not properly fixed in the
right places.
h) The lifts have not been painted properly and maintained as
promised.
As the work done by the opposite party is incomplete they have difficulty in using the flats. The complainants are put to great hardship and even within two months of occupation the walls have developed cracks making living a difficulty. Accordingly the complainants have issued a legal notice to the opposite party on 4.1.2013 and the same was acknowledged by the opposite party but the opposite party has not replied so far. As such the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and damages to the complainants. As such the complainants have sought for provide with teak wood for main doors, to replace the toilet closets and plumbing materials like taps and showers with branded and the choice of the complainants, to provide wardrobe, replace the electrical wiring and switches with the brands of the complainants choice, to repaint the walls both interior and exterior, etc. or in the alternative to allow the complaints to make the repairs and direct the opposite party to bear the costs of such works and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation and mental agony with cost of this proceedings to the complainant. Hence the complaint.
2. Even after receipt of the notice, the opposite party did not appear before this Forum and did not file any written version on his behalf. Hence the opposite party was set exparte on 9.01.2014.
3. The 3rd Complainant has filed his proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 were marked on the side of the complainant.
4. The points that arises for consideration are as follows:
1. Whether the opposite party committed any deficiency
in service?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
5. POINT NOs: 1 & 2:
Perused the complaint, proof affidavit filed by the 3rd complainant on behalf of all the complainants and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A4 and considered the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the complainants. The complainants’ case is that the complainants are the original owner of the land and entered into an undivided construction agreement with the opposite party promoter and developer for the construction of the 10 flats in the said property among them three flats contained in the 2nd floor is agreed to be given to the complainants herein by the opposite party and the constructions has to be completed and said flats are to be handed over to the complainants. Whereas the complainants have stated that contrary to the said agreement / joint venture Ex.A1, the opposite party had built 11 flats despite of the complainants’ objection. The opposite party has completed and handed over three flats to the complainants on 11.09.2011. However the built flats are done in appalling condition and the construction were defective as follows:
a) The main doors were not made out of the material as promised
b) The toilet closets and plumbing materials like taps and showers
were not in the brand as promised.
c) The wardrobe was not put up as promised.
d) The electrical wiring and switches are not up to the standard
design and brands. The wirings and switch boards have come off
the walls and the switches broken down.
e) The painting to the walls were in-complete – the internal walls
were not coated with two coats of putty. Only wall primer has
been painted.
f) The external wall paintings are incomplete.
g) The fans, switch boards and mains were not properly fixed in the
right places.
h) The lifts have not been painted properly and maintained as
promised.
Which are deviations and contrary to Ex.A1 agreement mentioned in specification. As such the complainants have issued a legal notice dated 4.1.2013 through counsel and the same was received by the opposite party under Ex.A3 postal acknowledgement. However the opposite party neither complied the notice mentioned request made by the complainant nor sent reply. On perusal of Ex.A1 and the complaint mentioned specification of constructions of flat which were handed over to the complainants are defective and not in accordance with the agreement mentioned specification can be very well known by perusing the photograph filed by the complainants under Ex.A4. Therefore the complainants’ case is that the opposite party has not properly constructed the flats by providing the material as mentioned in the specification of construction agreement is acceptable. Despite of notice the opposite party has not come forward to rectify the defective construction by using the proper materials as agreed in the construction agreement is also acceptable. As the opposite party has committed deficiency of service in constructing the flats as per construction agreement Ex.A1 by which the complainants have suffered mental agony and hardship are all acceptable.
Further the opposite party though appeared through counsel in beginning of this proceedings, but subsequently not filed written version and not contested the case as such they remain set exparte in this proceedings, Therefore there is no valid denial or contrary evidence on the side of the opposite party.
6. Therefore we are of the opinion that the opposite party is liable to rectify the said defects in the constructions as detailed in the complaint. Further the claim of the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- is also highly exorbitant and considering the circumstances of the case a sum of Rs.50,000/- would be reasonable and also a sum of Rs.5000/- to be paid as cost of this proceedings to the complainants and accordingly this points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainants.
In the result, the complaint is allowed in part. The opposite party is directed to rectify the defects in the constructions as detailed in the complaint and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and hardship and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as cost of the complaint to the complainants.
The opposite party has to comply the above said constructions and payment of the said compensation & cost within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till the date of realization.
Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the 19h day of February 2015.
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s Side Documents:-
Ex.A1- 10.06.2010 - Copy of Joint venture and Development
agreement.
Ex.A2- 4.1.2013 - Copy of legal notice.
Ex.A3- - - Copy of Ack. Card.
Ex.A4- - - Copy of Photographs.
Opposite party’s Documents : .. Nil .. (exparte)
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
