By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 for an Order directing the opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the deficiency of service in work conducted by the opposite party in house construction of complainant's daughter.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The complainant entered in to an agreement with opposite party for the construction of Door, Staircase and Kaivari in the house of his daughter for a sum of Rs.1,60,000/-. The opposite party undertook to complete the work and on several occasions, the opposite party collected Rs.1,46,500/- from the complainant. But the opposite party did not complete the work. The work done by the opposite party is with low quality materials. The complainant could not fix the house warming function since the work is not completed. The complainant thereby sustained a loss of Rs.50,000/- due to the non completion of work and usage of low quality materials. So the complainant alleges deficiency of service from the part of opposite party. Hence this complaint.
3. On receipt of complaint, Notice was issued to the opposite party and the notice was returned with an endorsement “Addressee left, so returned to the sender”. But in the opposite party's address furnished by the complainant, the name of 'Roy' is struck off and again notice was send to the opposite party by special messenger. That notice was served to the opposite party on 24.04.2014. But opposite party did not appear before the Forum. The opposite party's name called and set ex-parte on 26.05.2014.
4. On going through the complaint and documents produced by the complainant, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is deficiency of service from part of opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- In addition to complaint, the complainant filed proof affidavit. The complainant is examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1 to A2 and Ext.C1 is also marked. Ext.A1 is the Agreement entered into between the complainant and opposite party, Ext.A2 is the Payment Receipt of Rs.50,000/- paid to opposite party. Ext.C1 is the Expert Commissioner Report. As per I.A 247/2014 an Expert Commissioner was appointed and the Commissioner inspected the house and filed Report. The Commissioner reported that the total amount of work completed is valued as Rs.1,45,600/-. The total value of work as agreed is Rs.1,60,000/-. According to the Commissioner, the percentage value of balance work is 9% and its value is Rs.14,400/-. The Commissioner found certain rectification in completed area and the rectification work is valued to Rs.7,280/-. So the value of uncompleted work is to be added with the value of rectification work. So the total amount of work to be done by the opposite party will come to Rs.21,680/-. The total agreement amount is Rs.1,60,000/- out of which, the complainant paid Rs.50,000/- as advance and Ext.A2 Receipt is produced to prove it. But the complainant says that the opposite party had accepted Rs.1,46,500/- from the complainant. But no receipt is produced for the balance payment. There is no material before the Forum to prove that what is the actual amount paid by the complainant and received by the opposite party. The commissioner stated that the value of completed work is Rs.1,45,600/-. It is up to the opposite party to state the actual amount received by the opposite party. But the opposite party did not appear at all. So there is nothing to disbelieve the case of complainant. The Forum found that there is deficiency of service from the part of opposite party in completing the work. So the complainant is entitled to get Rs.7,280/- as the value of rectification work and Rs.900/- as excess payment (ie 1,46,500- 1,45,600=900). Since the relation between the complainant and the opposite party became bad, directing the opposite party to complete the work will not be fair and proper. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since Point No.1 is found in favor of complainant, the complainant is entitled to get the cost and compensation.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to to pay Rs.7,280/- (Rupees Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Eighty only) being the value of rectification work and Rs.900/- (Rupees Nine Hundred Only) being the excess amount accepted by the opposite party together with Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as compensation for the mental agony and financial loss sustained to the complainant and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings. The opposite party is directed to pay the above total amount Rs.18,180/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand One Hundred and Eighty only) to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest for the whole amount.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of September 2014.
Date of Filing:22.03.2014.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1(Proof Affidavit). K. Abdul Khader.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Agreement. Dt:10.09.2013.
A2. Payment Receipt.
C1. Expert Commissioner Report.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
