IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Saturday the 30th day of January, 2016
Filed on 25.11.2014
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.318/2014
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. P.G. Sugathan 1. Sri. Syam Kumar
N.E.C. Building Erumappurathu Veedu
Kaitha North Tile Shop, Panampally Junction
Chettikulangara P.O. Peringala, Alappuzha District
Alappuzha District
(By Adv. Pramel. P.) 2. Sri. Akhil Vijayan, Vijaya Bhavanam
Nadakkavu, Peringala
Alappuzha District
(By Adv. K.P.Nandakumar)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant entered into an agreement on 3.8.2013 with the opposite parties for the construction of his house by name “Modular Construction” for a consideration of Rs.30 lakhs within 3months from 17.8.2013 to 17.11.2013. Since, the opposite party failed to comply the conditions of the agreement. Complainant prepared a new agreement on 9.1.2014 and again on 27.3.2013 another agreement was prepared on condition that the opposite parties will complete the construction and will hand over the key on 8.4.2014. Since the construction was not completed, the complainant himself spent an amount of Rs.3,25,000/- for the construction of staircase. Since the complainant’s son’s marriage was on 27.4.2014, they began to reside in the house from 24.4.2014. Fascinated of the assurance of the opposite parties, the complainant entered into the agreement. But the opposite parties constructed the house by using low standard quality materials. The house constructed by the opposite parties was not safe and have so many defects. He made complaints before the opposite parties, but was not redressed by them. Complainant sent legal notice on 16.9.2014, but no reply was received. Alleging deficiency in service the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the opposite parties is as follows:-
The delay in completing the construction within the period is not due to the deficiency of the opposite parties, but due to the delay in getting the Modular Slabs from the company. He constructed the house by using materials of good companies. In the agreement there is no condition for the modification of the staircase and hence it is to be done by the complainant by his own expenses. All the constructions were done only as per the conditions of the agreement. Complainant took possession of the house in good condition. The opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service.
3. The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A15. Expert report filed marked as Ext.C1. No oral or documentary evidence adduced on the part of the opposite parties.
4. The points for consideration are:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- If so the reliefs and costs?
5. It is an admitted fact that the complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite parties for the construction his house by name “Modular Construction” for a consideration of Rs.30 lakhs. It is also an admitted fact that the complainant occupied the house constructed by the opposite parties on 24.4.2014. According to the complainant, the house handed over to the complainant was not completely ready for occupation. Opposite parties had used sub standard materials of constructing the house and has so many defects. Opposite parties filed version denying all the allegations of the complainant. In order to substantiate the allegation of the complainant, he filed an application for appointing an expert to inspect the house constructed by the opposite parties. Opposite parties filed objection against the application for appointing an expert. Forum allowed the application and appointed Mr.Ratheesh whose name was suggested by the opposite parties. But the said expert expressed his unwillingness to execute the commission work. Hence another expert named Mr.Muhammed Asif was appointed and expert report filed him is marked as Ext.C1. Thereafter the opposite parties remained absent. Complainant filed proof affidavit along with 15 documents. The proof affidavit filed by the complainant in support of his allegation remains unchallenged. As per the expert commission report, lots of finishing works are pending. The pending works as per the Ext.C1 report are the following:-
1) Septic tank and sewage water tank
2) Wiring and fittings
3) Hand rails for sit out and first floor
4) Doors and windows are not properly closed
5) One toilet is balance to construct from first floor
6) Steps from kitchen to get outside
7) Floor edges and corners not finished
8) Bathroom fittings are damaged
9) Leakage found in roof and toilets
10) Painting not done
11) Paving tiles not laying in parking
12) Ceiling also damaged due to leaking
13) Eave boards not fixed on roof
14) Woods are decayed
The expert opined that Rs.9,12,000/- is to be spent for completing the pending works. The opposite parties have not filed any objection to the report filed by the expert. The evidence produced by the complainant has gone un-rebutted. The statement of the opposite party in the version that complainant took possession in good condition is not sufficient to rebut the existence of the defects pointed out by the expert. From the evidence on records, it is clear that there is defect and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
In the result, complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to complete the pending works suggested by the expert commissioner at their cost within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. Failing which the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.9,12,000/- (Rupees two lakhs and twelve thousand only) with 8% interest to the complainant from the date of filing the complaint till realization. The opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of this proceedings to the complainant.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of January, 2016. Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - P.G. Sugathan (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Photos
Ext.A2 - Photo of the uncompleted building
Ext.A3 - Agreement for building where owner supplies plot of land only
Ext.A4 - Agreement to the construction of building
Ext.A5 - Third agreement to the construction of building
Ext.A6 series - Bills of Indian Paint House
Ext.A7 - Receipt for Rs.25 lakhs received by the opposite parties
Ext.A8 - True copy of the receipt for Rs.3 lakhs
Ext.A9 series - Bills (3 Nos.)
Ext.A10 series - Retail invoice of Ponnus Steels (3 Nos.)
For the Hon’ble District Collector, Alappuzha
Ext.A11 - Statement of account from 1.1.2014 to 14.10.2014
Ext.A12 series - Copy of the Legal notice dated 16.9.14 with acknowledgement cards and
Postal receipts to the opposite parties
Ext.A13 - Plan of building
Ext.A14 - True copy of the item names and rate
Ext.A15 - Receipt for Rs.15,000/-
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
