Kerala

Trissur

CC/07/267

Rajan.T.K. - Complainant(s)

Versus

T.Sajeevkumar - Opp.Party(s)

V.S.Sudheesh

31 Jul 2008

ORDER


CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
Ayyanthole , Thrissur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/07/267

Rajan.T.K.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

T.Sajeevkumar
SB Human Welfare Technologies
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Padmini Sudheesh 2. Rajani P.S.

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):
1. Rajan.T.K.

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. T.Sajeevkumar 2. SB Human Welfare Technologies

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):
1. V.S.Sudheesh

OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

By Smt Padmini Sudheesh, President The facts of the case in brief is as follows: Petitioner had entrusted the 1st respondent for construction of bio gas plant in his premises. Respondent 1 himself introduced that they are one of the renowned institution constructing bio gas plants with modern technology. So the petitioner had applied for a loan in Syndicate Bank, Thrikkoor. For availing the loan 1st respondent had prepared an estimate in their letter pad and the estimate also submitted in the Bank. Subsequently on 29/5/06 a Demand Draft for Rs.20,000/- had sent directly to Respondent 1 from the bank. Respondent 1 had started the work on the day of application submitted for availing the loan. Some materials were bought and Rs.15,000/- has spent towards the construction at that time. After availing the loan amount no work is done by the respondents. Several times petitioner had contacted the 1st respondent for completion of the work. But it was not done. He had incurred loss of Rs.35,000/-. No remedy is availed. Hence this complaint. 2.Respondents were set exparte on 7/5/07. 3. To prove the case petitioner has filed affidavit and 2 documents. The documents are marked as Exhibits P1 and P2. 4. According to the petitioner he is entitled to get completion of the work of bio gas plant within a fixed period and also Rs.12,650/- as the excess amount received than the estimated amount and interest. As a subsidiary relief he claims the amount of Rs.35,000/- with interest. He also claims compensation. 5. There is no evidence to the contrary. 6. In the result complaint is allowed and the respondents are directed to complete the construction of the bio gas plant within one month and also pay Rs.12,650/- (Rupees Twelve thousand six hundred and fifty only) with interest @ 12% from 29/5/06 till realization. If the work is not completed within a month the respondents must pay a total sum of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty five thousand only) with 12% interest from 29/5/06 till realization. Compliance one month. Petitioner is entitled for Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost. Dictated to the Confdl. Asst. transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open forum this the 31st day of July 2008.




......................Padmini Sudheesh
......................Rajani P.S.