IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA
Friday the 21st day of January, 2022
Filed on 29.06.2021
Present
1. Sri.S.Santhosh kumar, BSc, LLB (President)
2. Smt.C.K.Lekhamma, BA, LLB (Member)
In
CC/No.119/2021
Between
Complainant:- Opposite parties:-
Smt.Mani Mohan, 1. Sredha Builders Charummood
W/o Mohan, Rep. by its owner Sri. Satheesh
Sreesailam House S/o Sadanandhan,
Kizhakkemuri, Valliyath House, Thamarakulam-PO Peroorkarazhma Muri,
Mavelikara Taluk Charummood-PO
Alappuzha -690530 Thamarakulam Village
(Adv.Sri.R.Gopalakrishna Pillai) Mavelikara Taluk
2. Smt.Mini Satheesh
W/o Satheesh
Valliyath House,
Peroorkarazhma Muri,
Thamarakulam Village
Mavelikara Taluk
(Adv.Smt.T.Radha)
(Ops are Exparte)
O R D E R
SMT.C.K.LEKHAMMA (MEMBER)
The complainant is residing in Mumbai along with her husband. The complainant is owned 47 cents property. There is a residential building situated in the said property.
That opposite parties are running a building construction contract work in the name and style of Sredha Builders. They are close relatives of the complainant.
The complainant decided to carry out the extension work and renovation of the residential building and the opposite parties approached the complainant and promised that they will do the renovation and extension work of the residential building with due care and by using good quality of materials. They have drawn a plan elevation and estimate (Rate and specification for construction on Turnkey basis) and sent from their whatsapp No.9497338764 to the husband of the complainant whatsapp No.9930860666 and the complainant had accepted it. The opposite parties agreed to complete the work within 2 to 3 months for total an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- (Thirteen lakh only)
As per the demand of the opposite parties, the complainant has send Rs.11,00,000/- (Eleven lakh only) through Bank of Baroda, SBI, to Canara Bank NEFT Account of the opposite parties. Further there was a Teak wood which was cut and kept in the building site and then was a jack wood tree in another plot belongs to the complainant, opposite parties demanded that they require these Teak wood and jack wood tree. They have fixed the value of the wood as Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakh only) which will be included in the rate for construction work. The opposite parties have hired the labourer, a wood cutter for cutting the jack wood and transporting the jack wood as well as Teak wood in the absence of the complainant. Thus the complainant had paid the entire amount which included Rs.11,00,000/- paid in cash and Rs.2,00,000/- the value of the wood.
The complainant had told the opposite parties that they will be coming the house on 15.03.2021. The opposite parties agreed that the entire work will be finished by that time.
The complainant has reached home on 15.03.2021. But it is seen that only 60% of the construction is completed. The materials used are very inferior quality. The opposite parties are used the old iron bars which they got while cutting the portion of the old RCC. The old window removed from the building was refixed in front room southern wall. From the existing length, one feet was cut and thus reduced the length of the window. The opposite parties are used the rejected quality of Granite in the Kitchen. (The Granite are having crack) Even through bathroom cum latrine is constructed, there is no ventilation or exhaust fan fitted. Thus the bathroom cum latrine cannot be used. In all the extended work site, the side tiles are not fixed. Due to the extension of the sit-out the old RCC as not properly aligned with extension RCC thus while rainy season the water is not draining out and accumulated at the top of RCC. The opposite parties have not plastered the top also. Even though the opposite parties agreed to use good quality jack wood in the front door and good quality imported Hard wood (Anjili) for windows and door frame, they used very poor quality of wood in the paneling and used the old windows and doors which was removed. The painting work is also not completed. Now more than 40% work is to be done to complete the work. Only one window is affixed in the stair case room which is also removed from the existing site. There were drawing of two windows in that room. More over the old door fixed in that rooms. The opposite party dismantled the showcase rack with some casual labour thus it got damaged. The damaged showcase was fitted. The south western portion of the building (kannimoola) the RCC was in slanding (which is against vasthu) that also to be leveled.
That the following works yet to be done they are (1)Pooja room (2) fixing of glass above pergola (3) sopanam work not completed (4) cladding tiles work on the porch and sit out pillar. (5) replacing the broken tiles and fixing tiles wash basin etc. (6) fixing of hand rail (7) Leveling the top portion of joint RCC including clearing water path (8) fixing door on the show case (9) painting (10) Removing the waste from the work site and many other job in yet to be completed and for that more than Rs.5,50,000/- is necessary.
The opposite party has committed deficiency of service and the complainant could not reside in the in completed residence even though she has paid the entire amount of Rs.13,00,000/- ie, Eleven lakh by cash and two lakh by the cost of timber. Due to the negligent act of the opposite party the complainant suffered mental agony and mental strain, an amount Rs.2,00,000/- (Two lakh) to be recovered from the opposite party for the mental strain. Hence the complainant seeking following reliefs:-
i. To pass an award of Rs.5,50,000/- along with 12% interest from the opposite party and from his assets to complete the job.
ii To pass an award of Rs.2,02,000/- as compensation and cost of the proceedings.
2. The points that arose for determination are as follows.
(i) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any refund from the opposite parties?
(ii) Whether there is any deficiency in service committed by opposite parties? If so what would be the quantum of compensation?
(iii) Reliefs and cost if any
3. The complainant filed proof affidavit with documents. Ext A1 to A7 and C1 were marked. The opposite parties were set ex parte. Since version was not filed in time. There after we have heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. Point Nos.1 & 2.
The complainant is residing with her husband in Mumbai, She had entrusted the renovation and extension work of her residential building with the opposite parties, they are doing construction work in the name and style of Sredha Builders. They have drawn Ext.A1 Plan and elevation of the construction and also issued Ext. A2, Rate and specification for construction. It is mentioned the total amount for construction is 13 lakhs and mode of g, nature of construction, period of construction and specifications of work etc. As per the demand of the opposite party, the complainant paid Rs.11,00,000/-through Bank of Baroda, SBI, to Canara Bank NEFT Account of the opposite party and also handed over Teak wood and Jack wood worth Rs.2,00,000/-,belongs to the complainant to the opposite party. So altogether the complainant paid Rs.11,00,000/- in cash and Rs.2,00,000/-the value of the wood totaling Rs.13,00,000/- (thirteen lakhs).
But the opposite parties failed to complete the construction within the time as they assured. They have finished only 60% of construction on 15.3.2021. Found various constructional detects such as the inferior quality, materials used for construction, poor quality wood used, top plastering is not done, tile work and granite used is not up to the expectation etc. So the construction was not in tune with what they agreed. The works done by the opposite parties are not as much as the expectations of the complainant. Since everything is contrary to the assurance made by the opposite parties to the complainant. Hence, issued Ext.A3, the Lawyer’s Notice. Ext A6 is the reply for the same. It is found that many other work is yet to be completed expensing that are more than Rs.5,50,000/-. Ext.A7 is the photographs of the timber that the complainant had sold to the opposite parties.
On perusal of Ext.C1, the Commission Report and the photographs produced along with are the only evidence of the alleged construction. At the time of the inspection, both parties are present. As per C1, almost all structural construction was over and reported various defects noticed in the construction. The estimate for the remaining works and rectification mentioned in the C1 report is Rs.1,72,800. Another sum of Rs.2,01,200/- is the expenses for painting. Both expenses totaling Rs.3,74,000/-. The case of the complainant is that she had paid Rs.13,00,000/- ie, Eleven lakhs by cash and two lakhs by the cost of timber, to the opposite party. The said amount is the entire cost of construction as per Ext.A2. Due to the incompletion of construction complainant is entitled to refund the amount estimated for remaining work in the C1 report with interest from the opposite party. At the same time, there is no evidence before us to show that the complainant had paid the said amount and also sold timber worth Rs. Two lakhs to the opposite parties. However, the evidence of the complainant remained unchallenged. In the absence of reliable evidence, we are constraint to believe the complainant. It seems that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service. Therefore, complainant is entitled to get compensation. Having considered the entire evidence on records and the circumstances involved in this case we are of the firm opinion that the agony of the complainant would be abated by the following order.
4. Point no.3
Accordingly, we allow complaint in part and direct as follows:-
1. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to refund Rs.3,74,000/-with interest @8% p.a from the date of complaint till realisation, to the complainant.
2. The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) by way of compensation and Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) towards litigation cost to the complainant.
The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Commission on this the 21stday of January, 2022.
Sd/-Smt.C.K.Lekhamma (Member)
Sd/-Sri.Santhosh Kumar (President)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Plan elevation of the construction
Ext.A2 - Rate and specification for construction
Ext.A3 - Copy of notice
Ext.A4 - Postal receipt
Ext.A5 - A/D card
Ext.A6 - Copy of reply notice
Ext.A7 - Photos (2 Nos)
Evidence of the opposite parties:- NIL
// True Copy //
To
Complainant/Oppo.party/S.F.
By Order
Assistant Registrar
Typed by:- Sa/-
Compared by:-
