By Jayasree Kallat, Member:

 

            Petition filed on 18-9-09. Complainant had approached the opposite party for the construction of a temporary shed at the premises of the property of the complainant at Kappad. The opposite party had given a quotation for the work as per which opposite party had assured to construct the basement with granite, and build the walls with laterate stone and roof with A.C. sheet.   Opposite party had also given assurance to plaster and paint and do the finishing work for which Rs.25000/- was the rate fixed. Complainant had given Rs.2000/- towards advance to O.P.1. Opposite party had given a receipt for the advance amount. On 14-8-08 opposite party-2 approached the complainant and informed that the construction was almost finished and received an amount of Rs.15000/-. O.P.2 had endorsed over the quotation for receiving Rs.15000/-. The opposite parties had received an amount of Rs.17000/- towards the construction of the shed. When the complainant visited the place he came to know that opposite parties-1 and 2 had not finished the work. Opposite parties had assured to finish the work within 10 days. The complainant is alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite party for not finishing the construction work, even after receiving Rs.17000/- out of the total amount of Rs.25000/-. Hence this complaint.

 

            Notice sent to O.P1 was served. But O.P.-1 did not appear before the Forum. Notice to O.P.2 returned with the endorsement “not known”. Hence the opposite parties-1 and 2 were called absent and set exparte. The complainant has taken substitute service against  O.P.2.    Paper publication was produced by complainant.

 

            The complainant was examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A3 were marked on complainant’s side.

 

            The case of the complainant is that he has made an agreement with opposite party-1 And O.P.2 and fixed Rs.25000/- as the rate to finish the construction work of a temporary shed in his property at Kappad. O.P.1 has received Rs.2000/- and O.P.2 has received Rs.15000/- towards the construction cost. According to the complainant opposite parties have not done the work for the amount paid. The work done was for only about Rs.5000/-. The complainant is alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. The Forum is of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get compensation for hardships he had to suffer due to the negligence, deficiency of service and unfair trade practice of the opposite party.

 

            In the result the petition is allowed and opposite parties-1 and 2 are directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within one month of receipt of the copy of the order. Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant.

 

Pronounced in the open court this the 19^th day of June 2010.

Date of filing: 18.09.2009

 

            SD/- PRESIDENT                   SD/- MEMBER            SD/- MEMBER

 

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Letter sent by O.P.-1 to the complainant.

A2. Receipt issued by O.P.1 to the complainant.

A3. Copy of Regd. Notice dt. 17-11-08.

 

Documents exhibited for the opposite party.

            Nil

Witness examined for the complainant:

PW1. Dr. Shamsuddin (Complainant)

 

Witness examined for the opposite party.

            None

 

                                                            Sd/- President

 

                                    // True copy //

 

                       

(Forwarded/By order)

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT.