IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOLLAM

DATED THIS THE   4^th DAY OF AUGUST 2022

Present: -        Sri. E.M.Muhammed Ibrahim, B.A, LLM. President

          Smt.S.Sandhya   Rani. Bsc, LLB ,Member

          Sri.Stanly Harold, B.A.LLB, Member

    CC.No.81/2021

Sajukumar C.,

Lekshmithoppil House,

Azheekkal, Prayar, Kollam.                                  :           Complainant

 (By Adv. George Varghese)

V/s

1. Binil, The Proprietor,

        Manjilas Steels,

       Kuthirapanthi P.O.,

       Vavvakkavu,

      Ocahira, Kollam.                                              :         Opposite Parties

2.  Manjilas Steels,

         Kuthirapanthi P.O.,

         Vavvakkavu,

          Ocahira, Kollam.

3.   Sri.Rexy John,     

           Edamana Thuruthil,

            Azheekkal P.O., Edachira, Kollam 690547.

ORDER

Smt.Sandhya Rani, B.Sc, LLB, Member

            This is a case based on a complaint filed U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.

The averments in the complaint in short are as follows:-

The complainant is an ex-service man.  1^st opposite party is a sole proprietor of Hardware of House Construction materials for the last 7 years by name and style Manjila Steels, Kuthirapanthi, Vavvakkavu, Oachira, Kollam.  2^nd opposite party runs under the name and style Manjila Steels, GST 14 UIN 32CTLP80501R124 Kerala State Code 32.  3^rd opposite party is the authorized local agent of 1^st opposite party.  The complainant was in need of constructing a roof on the top of his concreted house at Azheekkal having an area of 950 Sq.feet and he has entrusted the roofing work with 3^rd opposite party, who was the authorized local agent of 1^st opposite party.  The complainant has purchased some roofing materials from 2^nd opposite party for Rs.2,00,000/- but unfortunately certain bills were lost from him and now he is having bills for Rs.1,43,715 only which are produced herewith.  Apart from that the complainant had spent more than Rs.50,000/- as labour charges and other expenses for the above roofing work.  Thus the roofing works were completed on 01.01.2019 and it was started leaking since July 2020.  But when the complainant complained of the above mentioned leaking with opposite parties, they have behaved in an irresponsible way cannot be explained in words.  But while the roofing constructions were progressing the opposite parties had promised to the complainant that the roofing sheet would remainminimum 20 years without any damage and if any damage caused contrary to their promise the roof would be replaced  with their own labours , free of cost.  But their representations were false and without any bonafides.  According to opposite parties the sheet started rusting only because of the salty air, since the complainant is residing at Azheekkal, a seashore village.  That even after personal approach and legal notice the opposite parties were not taken any action to redress his grievances.  The above mentioned deliberate and intentional act of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties caused much mental agony apart from financial loss to the complainant.  According to the complainant this is a clear case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice .  In the circumstances the complainant prays to direct the opposite parties 1 to 3    1) to reconstruct the roofing with materials of ISI mark over the entire building    2) to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- 3) to pay Rs.3,50,000/-  being the entire cost including the compensation.  4) to pay Rs.20,000/- as expense incurred to the complainant for his legal purpose. 

Though notice was issued opposite parties 1 to 3 remained absent.  Hence they were set exparte. As per IA 310/2021 filed by the complainant an expert commissioner was appointed and the report filed by the expert commissioner. Complainant filed proof affidavit and got marked Ext.P1 to P4 documents and Ext.X1 expert commission report.  Heard the counsel for the complainant and perused the records.

Ext.P1 is GST INVOICES 5 in numbers.  Ext.P1(a) GST invoice dated 23.08.2018  for Rs.53,600/-.  Ext.P1(b)  GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.39,100/-.   Ext.P1(c)  GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.35,600/-.  Ext.P1(d)  GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.7,105/-. Ext.P1(e)  GST invoice dated 07.09.2019  for Rs.8,310/-. Ext.P2 Advocate notice dated 16.10.2020.  Ext.P3 postal receipt.  Ext.P4 acknowledgment card.  Ext.X1 commission report along with 7 photographs.

The  unchallenged averments in the affidavit coupled with Ext.P1 series tax invoices and Ext.X1 expert report would establish the case of the complainant.  The photographs 1 to 3 attached to Ext.X1 report would indicate that many places in the roof like the sheets, rafters, purlins, pipe supports etc are corroded both in pitched roof and lean to roof portions.  Photographs 4 to 6 attached to Ext.X1 shows that corrosion in the car porch roof is more than that of roof over the building.  Ext.P1(b) and P1(c) GST invoices dated 30.08.2018 would establish that the roofing sheet purchased was not Aluminium Trafford sheet, but JSW sheets having 0.35 mm thick.  That the roofing sheets purchased and used in the alleged building is of least thickness hence its expected life time and durability would be below 10 years.  However the roof of the car porch should be completely replaced and the roof over the building requires maintenance work.  That maintenance work includes scrapping the corroded

portions and painting with epoxy primer and applying two coats anti corrosive paint.  As per the report the cost required for replacing the car porch roof would be Rs.66,144/- and the cost required for maintenance of roof work of the building of the complainant would be Rs.43,821/-.  Thus the total loss happened to the complainant is calculated as per Ext.X1 expert report is Rs.1,09,965/-(66144+43821).

            The materials available on record would show that though the complainant has contacted the opposite parties several times for curing the above mentioned defects they did not turned up.  Thereafter he has sent legal notice to opposite parties 1 to 3   even then they didn’t take any action to redress his grievances.  By refraining from discharging their contractual obligation the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, which  according to the complainant has resulted much mental agony apart from financial loss to him.

In view of the above materials on record we are of the view that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties 1 to 3 as they have failed to reconstruct the roofing with materials of ISI mark or to pay cost required for replacing the car porch roof and for the maintenance of roof of building.  The complainant is also entitled to get reasonable compensation and costs from the opposite parties 1 to 3 jointly and severally and from their assets.    

            In the result complaint stand allowed in the following terms:-

Opposite  parties 1 to 3 are directed to reconstruct the roofing of the building and car porch with materials of ISI mark or to pay Rs.1,09,965/- to the complainant as cost of reconstruction of the same.

Opposite parties 1 to 3 are further directed to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation and Rs.7,500/- as costs of the proceedings.

Opposite parties 1 to 3 are directed to comply with the above directions within 45 days from today failing which the complainant is entitled to recover the above amounts except costs with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of complaint till realization from the opposite parties 1 to 3 and their assets.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant  Smt. Minimol S. transcribed and typed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the  Open Commission this the  4^th  day of  August 2022.  

                                                                                    S.SANDHYA RANI:Sd/-

E.M .MUHAMMED IBRAHIM:Sd/-

     STANLY HAROLD:Sd/-

Forwarded/by Order

                                                                                                            Senior superintendent

INDEX

Witnesses Examined for the Complainant:-Nil

Documents marked for the  complainant

Ext.P1 series   : GST INVOICES

Ext.P1(a)         : GST invoice dated 23.08.2018  for Rs.53,600/-. 

Ext.P1(b)         : GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.39,100/-.  

Ext.P1(c)         : GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.35,600/-. 

Ext.P1(d)        : GST invoice dated 30.08.2018  for Rs.7,105/-.

Ext.P1(e)         : GST invoice dated 07.09.2019  for Rs.8,310/-.

Ext.P2             : Advocate notice dated 16.10.2020.

Ext.P3             : Postal receipt

Ext.P4             : Acknowledgment card

Ext.X1            : Expert commission report

Witnesses Examined for the opposite party:-Nil

Documents marked for opposite party:-Nil