DATE OF FILING: 10.06.2011
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI
Dated this the 29th day of August, 2011
Present:
SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT
SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No. 128/2011
Between
Complainant : Jilmon John,
Madathil House,
Joance Regency,
Thodupuhza P.O,
Idukki District.
(By Adv: K.M.Sanu)
And
Opposite Party : V.P.Varghese,
Proprietor,
Cocooon Techniques, 56/3363,
Near South Over Bridge, Cochin – 16.
O R D E R
SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)
The complainant entered into a contract with the opposite party for the work of Aluminium composite panel. He had arranged his work for his hotel building. The complainant wanted to erect structural glazing and aluminium composite panel in the front part of his building. The opposite party had given a quotation for the work. As per the terms and conditions, the opposite party was agreed to supply good quality materials and well efficient labourers for the work. For the work, the complainant had paid Rs.24,11,689/- to the opposite party. As per the quotation, the opposite party demanded Rs.13,94,400/- for supplying of materials. In addition to this the complainant spent labour charges also. In total the opposite party had received Rs.24,11,689/- from the complainant. After completing the work, the front part of panel showed level difference and looking uneven between panel frame and sheet, the compound used for it became melted and formed lines in the glass sheet. The front part of complainant's building became untidy. This is also caused leaking and his wooden furniture leads to wet and damaged, the wall of the building also affected leaking. According to the complainant everything is happened due to the unskilled work of the opposite party. The supplied materials are also not in good quality so that the complainant demanded to complete the work with defect free. At first the opposite party agreed to do so, but afterwards he never responded the phone calls of the complainant. The act of the opposite party made the complainant to suffer a lot of hardships and for which he spent Rs.24,11,689/-. The complainant alleged deficiency of service against the opposite party and filed this petition before the Forum.
2. Inspite of repeated notice, the opposite party was absent. So the complainant himself served the notice of Forum as per by hand application and produced the courier receipt of the same. Hence the opposite party made exparte.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?
4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P3 marked on the side of the complainant.
5. The POINT :- Complainant was examined as PW1 and marked Exts.P1 to P3. Ext.P1 is the quotation given by the opposite party. Ext.P2 is the agreement with the opposite party, it shows the warranty also. Ext.P3 is a document shows the payment made by the complainant to the opposite party. Complainant in his petition submitted that he informed the opposite party several times for repairing and completion of work, but not done by the opposite party.
The act of the opposite party is a gross deficiency of service. So we think that the complainant is entitled for repairing the same. Complainant paid a huge amount which is Rs.24,11,689/- to the opposite party for doing the structural glazing frame work, aluminium composite panel, textur cladding E-board etc. in the complainant's hotel complex. But the work was done with unskilled labourers and low quality materials so that they became useless and ugly after few days. It caused mental agony and heavy financial loss to the complainant. Exts.P1 to P3 shows that the opposite party has received the payment of the same. These matters are not at all challenged by the opposite party in anywhere. So we think that the opposite party should repair the work done in the building without any default.
Hence the petition allowed. The opposite party is directed to cure the defect of the work done by the opposite party in the complainant's hotel building within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of August, 2011
Sd/-
SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)
Sd/-
I agree SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)
APPENDIX
Depositions :
On the side of Complainant :
PW1 - Jilmon John
On the side of Opposite Party :
Nil
Exhibits:
On the side of Complainant:
Ext.P1 - Quotation given by the opposite party
Ext.P2 - Copy of Agreement created between the complainant and the
opposite party with warranty
Ext.P3 - Statement of Account for the period Ist April 2010 to
11th August, 2011 issued by the opposite party
On the side of Opposite Party :
Nil
