D.O.F:11/07/2016
D.O.O:03/03/2023
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD
CC.No.195/2016
Dated this, the 3rd day of March 2023
PRESENT:
SRI.KRISHNAN.K :PRESIDENT
SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER
SMT.BEENA.K.G : MEMBER
N.M. Scaria, Nirappel,
S/o. Mathayi, Kanithadam,
Anappetti, : Complainant
Kalichanadukkam P.O,
Kasaragod- 671314
(Adv. Manikandhan Nambiar.K)
And
Anil Kumar,
Global Electricals,
Kalichanadukkam P.O, : Opposite Party
R/at Kottappara,
Kalichanadukkam P.O
Kasaragod- 671314
(Adv. T.C. Narayanan)
ORDER
SMT.BEENA.K.G: MEMBER
This complaint is filed against Opposite Party alleging deficiency in service in connection with the wiring work of his house. The complainant constructed a house in Kalichanadukkam in Thayanoor village Kasaragod district obtaining loan from Bhoopanayna Bank Chullikkara Branch. The complainant completed the construction work of the house, and was in search of expert persons for wiring work. Then opposite party approached the complainant and offered to finish the wiring work of the aforesaid house using quality materials. Both parties agreed and labour charge is fixed at Rs.100/- for one point. The opposite party collected Rs. 10,000/- as price of the electrical items and Rs. 3000/- as labour charge from the complainant. Even after collecting the amount opposite party failed to finish the wiring work of the house nor given completion certificate for electrical connection in KSEB. The allegation of the complainant is that opposite party has not completed the wiring work and used low quality materials. The oral contract between the complainant and opposite party is that after finishing the wiring work, the labour charge will be given as installments to opposite party. Due to the latches on the part of opposite party in finishing the wiring work the complainant was constrained to shift to the unfinished house. Even after the interference of mediators from the locality also, opposite party continued his adamant attitude. Now opposite party is demanding labour charge and price of the materials before completion of the house. The opposite party submitted a bill in a small piece of paper for low quality electrical items. Moreover, he is demanding Rs. 200/- for each point of wiring. The aforesaid attitude of opposite party caused severe mental agony and loss to the complainant. Hence the complainant is seeking a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- from opposite party along with an emergent order for finishing the electrical wiring work at the earliest.
The opposite party filed version stating that the complaint is false frivolous and is liable to be dismissed. According to the opposite party the complainant has suppressed the real material facts from this HonorableCourt and filed the complaint with ulterior motive. The contentions that he had approached the complainant two times and canvased the work of electrification of his house and therefore he entrusted the work with opposite party on the agreement that he would carry out the work at the rate of Rs. 100/- per point and that he had paid the opposite party an amount of Rs. 3000/- towards labour charges and Rs. 10,000/- towards the price of the materials and that there is a contract that the entire charges shall be paid by the complainant to opposite party in installments only after the completion of the work and that the materials used are not of good quality and only half of the work was completed etc are denied by the Opposite Party. There is no such agreement of contract or consumer – service provider relationship in between the complainant and opposite party. The opposite party further states that he is a business man by profession running a shop of electrical materials namely “Global Electricals” at Kalichanadukkam. Being an expert electrician, he was undertaking electrical works of houses for several years and acquired a goodwill in the field. But in order to concentrate in his shop he is not taking such works for the last one year. Formerly he had done wiring work of several houses in the locality of the complainant and knowing that complainant approached him for doing his work also. Even though opposite party explained his inconveniences the complainant requested him to give phone number of any other expert electrician so the opposite party gave the phone number of some electricians in the area including Mr. Babu. Accordingly the complainant contacted all those persons and lastly came into an understanding with BabuAnapetty . It was agreed to do the work on the condition that the complainant shall provide the necessary materials and Mr. Babu shall work on payment of labour charges only. It was learned that points were installed considering the minimum requirements of the house as required by the complainant and there was no agreement by fixing the charges @ Rs. 100/- . The complainant requested opposite party to supply the materials as enlisted by Mr. Babu Anapetty, for which he will pay the price. The opposite party further stated that he supplied the materials to the complainant from his shop in different occasions as enlisted by the electrician Mr. BabuAnapetty. The complainant did not care to pay the bill amount of the materials properly and the total amount to be paid by the complainant was Rs. 16,313/- . The complainant offered to pay the entire amount and settle the account at the earliest. But he could pay altogether an amount of Rs. 9000/- only as part payments in different occasions. After deducting the price of certain returned articles an amount of Rs. 6,900/- is still due from the complainant to be paid to the opposite party. He did not pay the amount inspite of repeated demands. The opposite party has no connection with the electrician Mr. Babu Anapetty. It is learned that Mr. Babu had finished almost 90% of the wiring and plumbing works by engaging five labours including himself for 5 days. As per the agreement between them the complainant had to pay Rs. 10,980/- towards labour charges. But he paid only an amount of Rs. 3000/- towards labour charges. Inspite of several demands he had not paid remaining portion of labour charges. Mr. Babu stopped further works due to non-payment of labour charges. The complainant approached the opposite party and requested to advice Mr. Babu to complete the work. But Mr. Babu was not in a position to complete the work without payment of the labour charges. The complainant requested to issue a completion certificate as his own, so as to get electrical connection for his house. But the opposite party was not ready to issue such fake certificate to the complainant. The complainant was not ready to pay the labour charges and Mr. Babu Anapetty was not interested to do further works. The complainant approached the panchayth member Mr. Boopesh for settlement of the issue and after enquiry he convinced and adviced the complainant to settle the matter by paying the balance labour charges to Mr. Babu and get the work completed. But the complainant was not ready for that. At last it is learned that somehow some other electrician completed the work. The opposite party further states that there is a district level association of wireman which had fixed the rate of wiring works to be charged from needy customers. The rate fixed by the association is Rs. 250/- per point. No electrician in this district can do the wiring work accepting a meager charge at Rs.100/- per point. There is no service deficiency on the part of Opposite Party. The Complainant is not entitled to damages and compensation. The Opposite Party had not caused any mental tension, agony or financial loss to the Complainant. There is no merit in the complaint. The intention of the Complainant is to avoid the payment of Rs.6,900/- being the balance bill amount of Electrical materials owed by him to the opposite party. So the complainant is to be dismissed with compensatory cost to the opposite party.
The complainant filed IA-84/17 seeking permission to complete the wiring work of his house with the help of some other electrician. IA is allowed and the work is completed. The complainant filed another IA to appoint an expert commission to note the points mentioned in work memo, the IA is allowed, the commissioner inspected the site and filed the report dated on 10/02/2015.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and was cross examined by the counsel of opposite party as Pw1. The documents produced are marked as Ext A1 and A2 series and C1 is also marked. The opposite party filed chief affidavit and was cross examined by the counsel of complainant as Dw1. The witnesses DW2 and DW3 were also examined. Ext.A1 series are the estimate of electrical items. Ext.A2 is the copy of the ration card of Alice Nirappel, wife of the complainant. Ext.C1 is the report of the expert commissioner.
The issues raised for consideration are
- Whether there is deficiency in service / or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for relief?
- If so what is relief.
For convenience all the issues are considered together. The specific case of the complainant is that the Opposite Party took the wiring work of his house has used substandard wiring items and left the work unfinished. Due to the latches on the part of opposite party the complainant suffered loss and severe mental agony. To prove the case, the complainant produced documents Ext.A1 series A2 and Ext.C1. The documents A1 series shows that the wiring items are purchased from opposite party. Ext.C1 report is filed on 10/02/2015. As per Ext.C1 report the petitioner has not given written clear direction to opposite party. He arranged the work through his neighbor Sri. Damu. Requirements of wiring boards are not specified. The commissioner inspected all the materials used for wiring, the materials are having ISI mark, V.Guard and the wires are of suitable GUAG as per standard are used. Boxes are star make and good quality. As per the Ext.C1 report wiring work is not completed. Fixing of main switch, switches and switch board and ELCB earthing etc. are to be completed. The wiring executed as per standard. It can also execute by reducing the points as per the opinion of the petitioner mentioned above. Finally, the quantity of the material used miss matches with the quantity in the quotation furnished by the contractor. The wiring contractor not considered the financial back ground of the petitioner and there is no proper communication between the contractor and the petitioner. The commissioner also prepared the wiring plan of the house
As per the Ext.C1 report, the quality of the materials used for wiring and electrification are of standard quality. Dw1 deposed before the commission that he is having wiring license now, but now he is the owner of an Electrical Shop, And not a member of wiring men’s association. He admitted that the complainant had purchased electrical items from his shop. But he denied the suggestion that he undertook the wiring work of the complainant’s house.
The complainant also deposed before the commission that opposite party is the owner of the shop “Global Electrical’s. The complainant has submitted the plan and estimate of the house before the bank. If the plan is produced before the commission it would have revealed how many points are directed for the house but that is not produced before the commission. The complainant admits that the contract entered in to between the opposite party is oral. The complainant in his cross examination submits that all electrical gadgets like fridge, TV, iron box etc. became nonfunctioning due to the latches on the part of opposite party. But it is not mentioned in Ext.C1 report. The complainant requested the commissioner to note the above said facts. DW2 is examined as he was the mediator in mediation talk between the complainant and opposite party. As admitted by the complainant DW2 had interfered in the dispute, DW2 would depose that the dispute was regarding the non-payment of labour charge by the complainant to MR.Babu, who done the wiring work. He also deposed that the settlement arrived at was that the complainant should pay the balance amount in labour charge and Mr.Babu should complete the work. DW2 categorically deposed that opposite party has no connection with the wiring work of the complainant’s house. DW2 further deposed that the electrical and plumbing items for the new house were purchased from the shop of the opposite party and he is not an electrical work contractor now.
We carefully gone through the affidavit and documents produced by both parties. We could not find any specific evidence to prove that opposite party has done the wiring work of the complainant’s house. The complainant failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. Admittedly complainant owes some amount to Opposite Party, as the price of electrical items. The opposite party argues that in order to escape from the financial liability to pay the dues this complaint is filed.
No material evidence is brought before the commission to show that the wiring work of the complainant’s house is done by the opposite party. Deposition of witness is also against the case of the Complainant. There are some contradictions in the statement of the Complainant also. In complaint it is stated that he purchased 10 cents of land to construct a house. But in cross examination he deposed that he has only 22 cents of land and the house is constructed there in. The Complainant further stated that he cannot say how much is the labour charge and what is the price of materials. All these prove that the Complainant is not bothered about payments in electrical shop and labour charges.
In the light of the above discussions we are of the view that the Complainant failed to prove deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. Hence, the complaint is dismissed with no order as to cost.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exhibits
A1: Estimate of Electrical items
A2: Copy of ration card
C1: Report of the Expert Commission
Witness Cross-examine
PW1: N.M. Scaria
DW1: Anil Kumar
DW2: Bhupesh.K
DW3: Umeshan.V.V
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Forwarded by Order
Assistant Registrar
Ps/
