BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 29/11/2010
Date of Order : 26/07/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 634/2010
Between
R. Venugopal, S/o. Ramachandran Embrandhiri, | :: | Complainant |
House No. 57/740, Meenavathy, Popathilal Compound, Near Gujarathy School, Palace Road, Mattancherry, Cochin – 2. |
| (By Adv. V.S. Afsal Khan, V.S. Associates, Kalpafiles, 3rd Floor, Velleparambil Building, Kaloor, Cochin - 17) |
And
Thrivikraman Nambissan, | :: | Opposite party |
Shreesadan, Palliyarakkavu, Kizhakenada, Mattancherry, Cochin – 2. |
| (Absent) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The undisputed facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
The complainant entered into an agreement with the opposite party for the reconstruction/repair of the residential building of the complainant. The total estimate prepared by the opposite party was Rs. 4,39,000/-. Out the amount, the complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs to the opposite party on 23-10-2009. After demolishing the part of the residential building, the complainant and his family is residing in a small room. Though the opposite party started the construction work, later he abandoned the same without any reason. The complainant requested the opposite party either to complete the work or refund the amount but in vain. The complainant had to suffer mental agony and inconveniences due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 3 lakhs from the opposite party together with compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs and costs of Rs. 5,000/-. Hence this complaint.
2. Though the opposite party appeared through a counsel, he neither filed version nor contested the matter. The complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A4 were marked on his side. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. The points that arose for consideration are :-
Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of the advance amount of Rs. 3 lakhs?
Compensation and costs of the proceedings?
4. Point No. i. :- Ext. A2 is the estimate for the renovation/reconstruction work of the residential building of the complainant. As per Ext. A2, the total cost of the above work is Rs. 4,39,000/-. The opposite party had received a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs from the complainant on 23-10-2009 evidenced by Ext. A3 receipt issued by the opposite party. Ext. A4 series photographs would show the present condition of the residential building of the complainant. According to the complainant, the opposite party had abandoned the work for reasons of his own without notice. By going through the evidence on record, it can be seen that the opposite party had deserted the site without any reason. The absence of the opposite party in this Forum as well speaks volumes. Evidently without demur, the complainant has had to suffer lot of inconveniences and mental agony due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party to which the opposite party is answerable not to mention personal jeopardy. In short, the opposite party is liable to refund the advance money received from the complainant.
5. Point No. ii. :- Since the complainant has no grievance for the specific performance of the contract, no compensation and costs are called for.
6. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite party shall refund Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) to the complainant for the reasons stated above.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the complainant shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. till realisation.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 26th day of July 2011.
