DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 26^th day of September 2012 

Present:  Smt.Seena.H, President

            : Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member

            : Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member                       Date of Filing : 8/8/2012

CC No.150/2012

Ponnu Palazhi,

S/o.Chami, Palazhi House,

Panammanna Desom,

Kanniyampuram Amsom,

Ottapalam Taluk                                  -        Complainant

(By Adv.U.Muhammed Musthafa)
 

Vs
 

1.Subramanian,

   Pulikkathodi House,

   Panamanna Desom,

   Kanniyampuram Amsom,

   Ottapalam Taluk

2.Sivanandan,

   S/o.Subramanian,

   Pulikkathodi House,

   Panammanna Desom,

   Kanniyampuram Amsom,

   Ottapalam Taluk                               -        Opposite parties

O R D E R

By Smt.PREETHA G NAIR, MEMBER

          The complainant had availed the service from the opposite parties to construct the furniture like coat and table. 1^st opposite party is the father of 2^nd opposite party and they are running a shop to construct the furnitures. The opposite parties demanded the wood to construct the funrnitures. Believe the words of opposite parties, complainant had given the  tree of jackfruit woods for an amount of Rs.12,000/- on 30/5/11. Further the opposite parties demanded Rs.6,900/-  for service charge. The complainant paid Rs.6,000/- for service charges on 30/6/11. But the opposite parties constructed the coat and table with least quality of woods instead of woods of jackfruit tree given by the complainant. After  receiving  the coat and table the complainant had informed that the opposite parties constructed the coat and table with jackfruit tree of woods and sold higher amount. The complainant asked the opposite parties to sold the furniture  with higher amounts. Then the opposite parties replied that they were sold the furniture to other persons for the financial  problems. They agreed  to give  the coat  and table construct  with jackfruit woods or pay an amount of Rs.12,000/- as compensation. But the opposite parties had not given the furniture or compensation. The act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the complainant prays an order directing the opposite parties to pay

1.    Rs.12,000/- as the cost of woods and

2.    Rs.6,000/- as the service charge amount and

3.    Rs.10,000/- as the compensation for mental agony and pay

4.    Rs.2,000/- as the cost of proceedings.

Opposite parties was absent. Hence set exparte. Complainant filed affidavit.

Issues to be considered are;

1.    Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties? 

2.    If so, what is the relief and cost?

 Issue No.1 & 2 

Heard the complainant. No documents from the side of complainant produced to show the transactions of furniture between them. According to the complainant they were neighbours. Even after receiving the notice from the Forum, the opposite parties had not appeared before the Forum and not filed version and affidavit. The complainant stated that they were neighbours and so no document was executed. Further the complainant has not taken commission to prove the defects of furnitures. The complainant admitted that the opposite party had given the coat and table made with least quality of woods. No evidence produced by the complainant to show the quality of furniture given by the opposite parties.  Further the complainant stated that opposite parties had agreed to pay Rs.12,000/- as compensation or to construct a new coat and table with woods of jackfruit tree. No  contradictory evidence produced by the opposite parties.

In the above discussions we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. In the result complaint allowed. We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to pay the complainant an amount of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) as cost of the wood along with compensation for mental agony and pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only)  as cost of the proceedings.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.           

Pronounced in the open court on this the 26^th day of September 2012.

 Sd/-

Seena.H,

President

 Sd/-

Preetha.G.Nair,

Member

 Sd/-

Bhanumathi.A.K,

Member 

                                              APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party

Nil

Cost Allowed

Rs.1,000/- allowed as cost of proceedings.