This complaint is coming before us for hearing, in the presence of            Sri. M. Hanumantha Rao, Advocate for complainant; and of Sri. P. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate for Opposite parties No.1 to 3; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing and having stood over for consideration this Forum passed the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha, Member)

This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.      The brief facts as mentioned in the complaint are that the complainant got constructed a new RCC Building in Sarapaka Village, Khammam District.  During the construction, the opposite parties No.1 to 3 approached the complainant on business promotion by introducing Bitla paints, after believing the words of them, the complainant entered into an agreement on 13-10-2011 for application of paints to his newly constructed house.  As per agreement, the opposite parties have to do work for interior portion of building as follows: 1) Two coatings of application of putty (Makku) 2) Paper finishing 3) Application of 1 coating of primer 4) Two coatings of colours as desired by complainant 5) Five door Spray polishes and Four window spray polishes with putty and colour 6) Four doors with putty and colour including grill colouring.  For exterior, 1) One coating primer 2) Two coating colour 3) Exterior putty and texture at some parts of parapet wall (elevation part) 4) Texture and putty to the compound wall on both sides and also painting the sit out portion with base coating and designer paints.  As per agreement, any modification would be accepted for painting and all the works should be completed within a span of two months from the date of agreement.  The opposite parties No.1 to 3 given warranty of 5 years.  According to the agreement, the complainant has to pay Rs.1,10,000/- out of which, the complainant paid Rs.1,00,000/-.  The complainant alleges that after painting one coating, the opposite party No.1 did not turn up inspite of several requests made by the complainant.  Meanwhile, the exterior wall, applied single coating paint was washed out after single rain.  The interior paint also detached from the wall and appears patches, due to which, the complainant unable to live in the house, residing as a tenant by paying huge rents, causes humiliation and mental agony.  Further the complainant also submitted that despite many efforts, the opposite parties did not perform their work as agreed under agreement.  Vexed with the attitude of opposite parties, issued legal notice on 17-05-2012 by demanding to complete the work under agreement or to pay damages of Rs.4,00,000/-.  Even after receiving notices, there was no response.  Having no hope of completion of work, filed the present complaint by praying to direct the opposite parties to return Rs.1,00,000/- together with interest and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- towards damages and costs.     

3.      In support of his case, the complainant filed Affidavit and Exhibits A-1 to A-5.

4.      On being noticed, the opposite parties No.1 to 3 appeared and filed counters.   In its counter, the opposite party No.2 denied all the averments of complaint by submitting that the present complaint is not maintainable under C.P. Act or on facts and the complainant is not the consumer to the opposite parties.  The very complaint is based on the alleged agreement, if any breach of agreement arose, the complainant can approach the civil court but not the consumer Forum.  The complaint was filed against opposite parties on personal capacity, which is not sustainable in the eye of law.  The complainant failed to establish the role of opposite parties under C.P. Act, the opposite party No.1 never worked as sales representative of Bitla Paints.  The complainant failed to produce expert opinion and could not produce any material evidence to prove that the colours applied are defective.  The opposite party No.2 further submitted that the work was started on payment of Rs.50,000/- as advance and finished 90% of work.  At the time of entering into the agreement, the opposite party No.2 and the complainant were signed on the agreement.  Later, the signature of opposite party No.1 also there on the agreement, filed before this Forum, it was obtained by the complainant by threatening the opposite party No.1.  After completion of most of the interior work, the complainant started Cupboard work, which was badly disturbed the paint work and forced to paint twice.  The complainant got painted the cupboard works in night times by managing the workers of opposite party No.2 and by giving some amounts beyond the agreement.  The workers, who did the work of cupboards used to do work at night times but the burden of payment was on the opposite party No.2.  The opposite party No.2 also stated that by threatening the painters, the family of complainant got painted as they desired by twice.  In the agreement, there was no mentioning of work to the Pent House, when the opposite party No.2 questioned about the payment for Pent House and Cupboard paintings, the complainant threatened the opposite party No.2 and his workers as his brother is working as C.I. of police, after calling, he also threatened the opposite party No.2, due to which, the opposite party No.2 forced to paint twice.  Further the opposite party No.2 also submitted that when he questioning about the misuse of paint and putty (due to application of twice) and asking for extra payment, he received the phone call from C.I. of police, who is the elder brother of complainant, he threatened the opposite party No.2 that he has faced dire consequences if he demanding the payment for extra work.  Upon which, the opposite party No.2 approached the S.I. of Burgamphad and requested to settle the matter.  Thereafter, the complainant got painted exterior parapet with interior paint by engaging other workers and raised a new complaint that the paints applied are not good and asked to paint again.  The opposite party No.2 also averred that the complainant and his brother threatened the opposite party No.2 by demanding to pay Rs.5,00,000/-, if he failed to pay the said amount they will damage his business badly.  The complainant and his brother managing the police to not to register the case against them.  Thereafter, the complainant filed a private complaint before Hon’ble JFCM, Bhadrachalam, which was referred to the police, Burgampahad.   The Police, Burgampahad registered the case vide Cr.No.77/2012 under sections 420, 406, 506 & 556 (3) of IPC.  The opposite parties moved an anticipatory bail petition before the Sessions Judge, Khammam.  When the opposite party No.2 was not available in the house, the police taken the wife of opposite party No.1 to the police station then the opposite party No.1 got arrested himself.  It is also the contention of the opposite party No.2 that he suffered a lot due to the adamant attitude of complainant.  The complainant filed the present case only to avoid the payment of balance amount of Rs.75,000/- and without any documentary proof regarding the negligence and deficiency of service on its part. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.  

          The opposite parties No.1 and 3 filed a memo by stating that to treat the contents of counter of opposite party No.2 as their written version.      

5.      In support of their averments, both the parties filed written arguments with almost all the same averments as mentioned in the complaint and counter.  Along with a petition vide IA.No.129/2013 the complainant filed CD of photographs, filed at the time of complaint and photocopy of House Tax Receipt dt.30-08-2015, marked as Exhibits A4 & A5 respectively.  Through a petition vide IA.No.12/2014 the Commissioner / Advocate was appointed for the purpose to note down the paint damaged areas by taking photographs.  As per orders of this Forum the Commissioner / Advocate filed the photographs of damaged areas after visiting scheduled property, marked under Exhibit C-1. 

6.      In view of the above submissions, now the point that arose for consideration is,

Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

Point:-       

According to the averments of complaint and counter, it is clear that both the parties have entered into an agreement on 13-10-2011 for painting works to the newly constructed house of complainant on payment of Rs.1,10,000/-.  The work was started after payment of Rs.50,000/- towards advance.  It is the case of the complainant that he had paid Rs.1,00,000/- out of agreed amount of Rs.1,10,000/-, the opposite parties did not turn up to complete the work after completion of one coating of painting, due to which, the exterior paintings were washed away after single rain, the interior paints also damaged due to patches, by alleging the deficiency of service, filed the complaint before this Forum as there was no response in completion of painting works as agreed and issued legal notice after seven months of entering into the agreement.  On the other hand the opposite parties denied all the averments of complaint by contending that they started the work on receipt of Rs.50,000/- towards advance and finished 90% of work, he spent extra amounts for repainting as desired by the family of complainant.  The opposite parties also averred that after completion of most of the interior work, the complainant started wooden work for cupboards, which was badly damaged the paintings, due to which, the opposite parties also forced to paint repeatedly at the damaged places.  It is also the version of the opposite parties that the complainant and his brother, who is the C.I. of police threatened the opposite parties and their workers, obtained their services and got painted as they desired, due to their threatening, the opposite party No.2 forced to paint the Pent House beyond the agreement.  The complainant completed the paintings of exterior parapet wall with interior paint by other workers, thereafter, asked to repaint with different colour.  After that, the complainant filed a private complaint before the Hon’ble JFCM, Bhadrachalam against the opposite parties No. 1 to 3.  Upon which, the police, Burgamphad registered the case under sections 420, 406, 506 & 556 (3) of IPC.  The opposite parties No.1 and his wife were arrested, the opposite parties No.2&3 were obtained anticipatory bail from the Hon’ble Sessions Judge, Khammam.  

After having perused the facts that have prevailed prior to filing of case on hand, we are of the opinion that those are quite contrary and could not establish under Consumer Protection Act.  The very purpose of C.P. Act is to provide speedy and quick relief to the aggrieved persons, so, the matters under this Act will be decided on summary procedure basing on documentary evidence by following the principles of natural justice and as such the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum is very limited.  Filing of only photographs of exterior parts could not reveal the real facts without proper trail.  Moreover, the complainant failed to place the proofs regarding the damaged parts of interior portion, impliedly, it appears that there is no dispute in application of paintings for interior portion.  In view of above circumstances, we cannot decide the case on hand, having quite contrary issues.  Accordingly, we are of the opinion, the complainant can approach proper Forum on his grievance.

7.      In the result, the complainant is directed to approach proper Forum on his grievance.   No costs.  

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us, in the open Forum on this the 31^st day of May, 2017.

Member                  FAC President

District Consumer Forum,

Khammam.

                                     APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainant                                                    For Opposite party

-None-                                                                  -None-

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:-                                                           For Opposite party:-   

Through Commissioner:-

Ex.C1:- Photographs of damaged areas (Nos.10, 1 CD).

Member                  FAC President

District Consumer Forum,

Khammam.