IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLLAM
Dated this the 29th Day of September 2022
Present: -Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LL.M. President
Smt.S.Sandhya Rani, Bsc, L.L.B,Member
Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member
CC.85/2022
Rekha.S : Complainant
D/o Radhesan
Reshma Nivas
Mayyanad P.O
Kollam-691303.
[By Adv.Boris Paul, Adv.Pradeepkumar.S.J,
&Adv.Pooja Sekhar]
V/s
Sujith Senan : Opposite party
S/o Pavizhasenan
Ambilichezhath,
Kannimel Cherry,
Kavand P.O, Kollam-691003.
FINAL ORDER
E.M.MUHAMMED IBRAHIM , B.A, LL.M, President
This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-
While the complainant was constructing a new residential building the opposite party introduced himself as a contractor who does roof work(shingles) and gave a proposal to do the roof work of the complainant’s residential building for a total amount of Rs.8,20,000/-. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.5000/- for Google pay as token advance and Rs.3000/- was paid vide cheque dated 30.12.2021. There after a written agreement was executed between the complainant and opposite party wherein the opposite party specifically agreed that the work will be completed within 30 days. On 07.01.2022 certain construction materials were brought to the site by the opposite party and he made an excuse that the delay was due to non availability of skilled workers and requested more time to start the work. However the opposite party was not properly executed the work and made all source of excuses from time to time for completion of work. On 17.01.2022 the opposite party undertook to execute certain additional work such as fitting angles over the compound wall, gate with 15 ft length and 6 ft width, stair with glass and steel and car porch. The total amount was fixed as Rs.1,15,000/- for the above work and the complainant paid Rs.70,000/- as advance payment. However the opposite party failed to carry out the work by alleging flimsy reasons. The work already done was unscientific and against engineering standards. In view of the work carried out it was revealed that the opposite party was not experienced in roof work as claimed by him and he was unable to continue the work. However the opposite party left the site abandoned and the complainant was unable to complete the construction of her residential building which was her life time dream. Inspite of several request over phone calls the opposite party did not turned up to complete the work. On 02.02.2022 the complainant filed a grievance petition before the Eravipuram Police as well as the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kollam against the opposite party. Accordingly the opposite party was summoned by the police authorities and the opposite party agreed in writing that he will complete the work on or before 04.02.2022. But there after also he failed to turned up and complete the work. The above conduct of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice. As the work carried out by the opposite party was against the accepted standards of engineering and hence the work should be dismissed and it has to be carried out properly by deputing another contractor. It is clear that the opposite party is a skilled person who is able to undertake such contract. Due to the above acts of the opposite party the complainant and his family members has suffered much mental agony apart from huge monitory loss. Hence the complainant filed the present complaint seeking to return the amount of Rs.3,75,000/- received by the opposite party and also directing the opposite party to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and also to pay costs to the complainant.
Though notice was served to the opposite party he failed to appear before the Commission. Hence he was set exparte on 30.04.2022. The complainant filed proof affidavit by re-iterating the averments in the complaint and got marked Ext.A1 to A5 documents. Ext.C1 expert report has also been marked in evidence.
Ext.A1 is the agreement dated 01.01.2022 executed between the complainant and opposite party. Ext.A2 is the receipt for advance payment dated 30.12.2022 to the opposite party. Ext.A3 is the receipt dated 02.02.2022 issued by Eravipuram Police on receipt of the Grievance petition filed by the complainant. Ext.P4 is the receipt dated 02.02.2022 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Kollam evidencing the receipt of grievance petition filed by the complainant. Ext.A5 is the undertaking executed by the opposite party in favour of the complainant on 02.02.2022 by stating that he would complete the work on or before 04.02.2022 and settle the account after an Engineer certified the roof work and if the Engineer points out any defects he is ready to cure the defect before settling the account.
The unchallenged averments in the complaint coupled with Ext.A1 to A5 documents and Ext.C1 report would indicate that the opposite has undertaken to carry out the roof work of the complainant’s residence and towards that work he has received Rs.5,000/- as in cash as advance and Rs.3,00000/- through cheque dated 30.12.2021 and also executed Ext.A1 agreement. But the complainant failed to carry out the work as agreed in Ext.A1 agreement and the part of the work carried out by the complainant is defective. As per Ext.C1 report it is clear that the proposed and actual roof foot prints are mismatched and there is height difference in roof and bent and non alignment in most of the rafters of roof truss. The expert estimated an amount of Rs.12,000/- for the materials brought to the site and another amount of Rs.50,000/- for the labour charge for the work already carried out. But due to the mistakes occurred during the work the truss became completely useless and has been demolished and re-build. According to the expert the work already done by the opposite party is against the Engineering standards. It is also brought out in evidence that as the work was not properly carried out and not completed within time the complainant and his family members has suffered much mental agony apart from financial loss. In view of the materials available on record it is clear that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party in carrying out the roof work of the complainant’s residence. In the circumstances the complainant is entitled to get back the amount of Rs.3,75,000/- obtained by the opposite party from the complainant towards the above works. The complainant is also entitled to get reasonable compensation.
In the result complaint stands allowed in the following terms:-
- The opposite party is directed to return Rs.3,75,000/- received from the complainant for carrying out the roof work and also to construct the additional work along with interest @ 6% p.a from the date of receipt of the amount.
- The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant and her family members.
- The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.5000/- as costs of the proceeding to the complainant.
The opposite party is directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from today failing which the complainant is directed to recover Rs.4,25,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of payment till realization from the opposite party and his assets.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant Smt. Deepa.S transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission this the 29th day of September 2022.
E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim:Sd/-
S.Sandhya Rani:Sd/-
Stanly Harold:Sd/-
Forwarded/by Order
Senior Superintendent
INDEX
Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:- Nil
Documents marked for the complainant
Ext A1: Original agreement dated 01.01.2022.
Ext A2: Original receipt dated 30.12.2022.
Ext.A3: Original receipt dated 02.02.2022.
Ext.A4: Receipt dated 02.02.2022.
Ext.A5 :Written agreement dated 02.02.2022.
Ext.C1 : Commission Report.
Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil
Documents marked for the opposite party:-Nil
