Shri B. Mukhopadhyay, President.   

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

            Practically in this case complainant has alleged that he hired service of the OP for water proofing treatment of the roof and to that effect after settlement a sum of Rs.17,000/- was paid and further paid Rs.14,000/- and lastly paid Rs.6,000/- after completion of that work and guarantee was for 10 years but after completion of that roof water proofing and treatment it was detected that in some places of that floor of the roof were found soaked for lack of standard work and for not taking corrective measures in roof water proofing and treatment and for such negligent manner of service complainant has suffered much and for which he has prayed for compensation.

            On the contrary OP by filing written version has submitted that he accordingly took all such steps and the service was quite scientific and there was no defect and may be for some other reasons in some places without any permanency is being soaked for some other reasons and further submitted that after inspection it was taken whether the work was done by the OP perfectly or negligently so he has prayed for dismissal of this case.

Decision with Reasons

Practically in this case ultimately one architecture engineer was appointed to determine some points as made by the complainant and Smt. Mala Mukherjee, LBS of KMC was appointed for holding local inspection in respect of the present dispute and she submitted report on 28-08-2013 after holding inspection on 26-08-2013 wherefrom it is found that practically there was no accumulation of water on the top of the roof at the time of inspection and further it was detected one water patch mark on the ceiling at the middle of the room centering on the fan point and that water patch mark is about 1.5 ft. in diameter centering round the fan point on the ceiling of the roof and also some patch marks have seen on the junction of the ceiling of the staircase on the second floor but no other defect was detected.

            Practically in this case Ld. Lawyer for the OP submitted that OP did such work in the building which is very old and due to heavy rain such sort of water patch mark in certain places were found and complainant have failed to prove any deficient manner of service but considering the entire fact and also the written version it is clear that complainant has paid for Rs.37,000/- for water proofing of the roof.  And fact remains for some reasons or otherwise in some places the water patch mark was found and invariably on the fan and junction point and no doubt OP gave 10 years guarantee and in the meantime just after the work the patches were found, so invariably it is the duty of the OP to remove those defects and for which we may direct the OP to remove such defects or give him such a compensation out of the total as paid for such water proofing of the roof.  Fact remains in this case complainant paid Rs.37,000/- for such work but water patch mark are found in some places so invariably it is the duty of OP to remove it and in the above situation we find that complainant’s grievances has some vitality and no doubt the service of the OP is found not up to the mark and for which complainant is entitled to get an order so that the OP may remove such defect and if OP does not want to remove it in that case OP shall have to pay compensation.

Hence,

Ordered

That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs with a cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only). 

            OPs are directed to remove all other defect at once and invariably within two months from the date of this order failing which OP shall have to pay Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) for compensation to the complainant within one month from the date of above two months given to the complainant for completion of such defect and if it is not complied by the OP in that case OP shall have to pay a punitive damages to the extent of Rs.10,000/- and same shall be paid to the State Consumer Welfare Fund and for repeated non-compliance of the Forum’s order the OP may also be prosecuted u/s.27 of the C.P. Act.

OPs are directed jointly and severally to comply the order strictly within one month from the date of this order by satisfying the entire claim of the complainant and by depositing the punitive damages on SCWF failing which for each months delay OPs1 and 2 shall have to pay a penal interest @Rs.2,500/- (at the rate of Rupees two thousand five hundred only) and if it is collected it shall be deposited to SCWF even after that if it is found that OPs are deliberately disobeying the Forum’s order in that case penal action u/s.27 of the C.P. Act, shall be taken against them for which they shall be liable.