Date of filing: 16.06.2022
Date of Disposal: 28.03.2023
BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BENGALURU – 560 027.
DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF MARCH, 2023
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 125/2022
PRESENT:
SRI.RAJU K.S,
SMT.REKHA SAYANNAVAR,:MEMBER
1) Sri Umesh Karanth,
S/o. Sri Rajashekar Karantth,
Aged About 44 Years,
2) Smt. Jairani Karanth,
W/o. Sri Umesh Karanth,
Aged About 40 years,
Both are residing at: No.16,
“Srinilaya”, 16th Main,
-
2d Stage, Bangalore-560050.
Rep by Sri.N.Mahalinga Bhat, Advocate
1) M/s. Sarvaloka Services ON-Call
Private Limited, (Housejoy), A company
Incorporated under the Companies
Act, 2013, Registered Office at
No. L-371, 5th Main, HSR Layout,
Sector 6, Bangalore-560102,
Represented by its Co-Founder and COO.
(Represented by Sri.Anupam Agarwal, Advocate)
2) Sri Sanchit Gaurav,
Prop: Architects4India.Com,
Registered Office at No.1133,
Service Road RPC Layout,
Vijayanagar, Bangalore-560040.
(Represented by Sri.Anupam Agarwal, Advocate)
//JUDGEMENT//
BY SRI. RAJU K.S, MEMBER
01. The complainant has filed this complaint under Section-35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 seeking for a direction to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.7,10,273/- towards construction cost with Rs.3,00,000/- interest and Rs.5,00,000/- for having rented residential building with Rs.1,00,000/- compensation, over all, the opposite parties have to pay Rs.21,10,273/-.
02. The case of the complainants is that, being instigated by the colourful advertisements of the opposite party the complainants contacted the opposite parties for their residential building construction. On negotiation the opposite parties agreed to construct the complainant’s house for Rs.1,450/- per Sq. ft. The complainants have made payment of Rs.2,00,000/- on 18.12.2019 as advance.
03. The complainants on 18.08.2020 entered a main booking agreement for construction with the opposite parties. As per main booking agreement the opposite parties agreed to construct residential building with a super built up area of 1300 Sq. ft. with compound wall area of 480 Sq. ft. for total cost of Rs.20,34,487/-. Further both parties agreed that, the complainants have to pay 15% of the total cost amount by deducting Rs.2,00,000/- advance payment. Further the complainants have agreed to pay 8% of the total cost amount after the completion of foundation. Another 12% of the total cost at the time of plinth stage, another 8% after completion of the bricks work and another 13% after completion of ground floor slab. Remaining 3% after completion of electricity work, 3% after completion of plumbing, 10% after completion of wood and grill work, 5% after completion of internal plastering, another 5% after completion of external plastering, 12% after completion of flooring and tiling, 3% after completion of painting and the balance 3% after completion of all works. The opposite parties have also agreed to provide 10 years warranty on structure, 10 years warranty on underground sump and 1 year warranty on seepage and all other constructions, services and 6 months on general warranty. The opposite parties agreed to complete the project within February-2021 with 03 months grace period for May-2021. As per agreement the project commencement was on August-2020. Accordingly the complainants have made payments as follows:-
01) Rs.2,10,173/- on 18.08.2020
02) Rs.1,46,000/- on 13.09.2020
03) Rs.1,00,000/- on 31.12.2020
04) Rs.54,064/- on December-2020 & January-2021 for labour payments. Total Rs.7,10,237/- payment have been made by the complainants to opposite parties.
04. Even after 35% of the project cost payment have been made by the complainants, the opposite parties have failed to complete the project. The project work has halted at the plinth stage itself. In-spite of repeated request the opposite parties were not ready to complete the project. Till today the project was in the initial stage of foundation work. The opposite parties miserably failed to do their part of duty as per main booking agreement. As per main booking agreement the project was supposed to complete in February-2021. In-spite of receiving 35% of project cost payment the opposite parties not at all interested in completion of the project. The opposite parties have interested in only receiving the payments. The opposite parties have done the sump tank and left open in the project site which was endangering to the life of people and stray animals due to non-construction of compound wall.
05. The complainants have issued a legal notice dated: 04.01.2022. Even after receiving the legal notice the opposite parties were unable to complete the construction by saying unnecessary reasons. For that, the complainants have issued termination of the contract notice on 12.03.2022. The opposite parties not at all interested to complete the project nor refunded the amount of Rs.7,10,273/- received from the complainants. Thereby the opposite parties are liable under deficiency of service to the complainant. Hence as there was no other way, the complainants have filed this complaint.
06. The notice sent by this Commission was served to the opposite parties on 07.07.2022, but the opposite parties filed version beyond the statutory period. Hence this Commission has not considered the version filed by the opposite party by its order dated: 29.11.2022, but permitted to participate in the proceedings.
07. The complainant No.1 (PW.1) has reiterated their complaint by filing affidavit in the form of his evidence in chief and got marked EX.P.1 to P.10 documents.
08. Both the parties have filed their respective written arguments.
09. On perusal of the respective pleadings and documents, the points that would arise for consideration are as under:-
(1) Whether the complainants have proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
(2) Whether the complainants are entitle for the
relief as sought ?
(3) What order ?
10. Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:-
Point No.1 : In affirmative
Point No.2 : Partly in affirmative
Point No.3 : As per the final order for the following;
REASONS
11. POINT NO.1:- In this complaint there is no dispute with regard to the final booking agreement dated: 18.08.2020 as per EX.P.2. There is no dispute with regard to the payment of Rs.7,10,237/- by the complainants to the opposite parties. Further as per photographs filed by the advocate for complainants vide Memo dated: 25.02.2023 reveal that, only ground works with initiation of pillars has been completed in the project site. Further the photographs reveal that, a sump was constructed in the said project site.
12. In-spite of appearance the opposite parties have not filed any documents which tends to show that, they have completed the project as per agreed terms and conditions of EX.P.2 Main Booking Agreement. The counsel for the opposite parties vehemently argued in their written arguments that, the complainants have concealed the material fact. Further the opposite parties have stated in the written arguments that, they have completed site cleaning, sump construction, column concreting, back filling, consolidation work up to plinth beam and PCC for plinth work. Further stated that, the opposite parties have completed more work compared to the amount received and the complainants themselves not willing to pay the amount as per the agreed terms and conditions in the EX.P.2.
13. Further due to impact of Covid-19 the labourers and skilled workers were not available. Even though the opposite parties have arranged labourers and workers with more difficulty with extra costs due to non-cooperation and non-payment accompanied with COVID related issues the opposite parties have not completed project work. The complainants themselves were responsible for incompletion of the project. There is no deficiency on the part of opposite parties. The complainants have due of amount towards construction constructed by the opposite parties.
14. The opposite parties have not filed any documents to substantiate their argument. In-turn the complainants have filed a memo dated: 15.03.2023 with email conversation held between the complainant No.2 and one megha,goyal@housejoy.in the authorized representative of opposite party No.1 under email ID SRIVARI 789
15. POINT NO.2:- With regard to the point No.2 is considered the complainants have paid Rs.7,10,237/- to the opposite parties. As per Memo dated: 15.03.2023 filed by the advocate for complainants they admitted the opposite parties have constructed 12% of the total project. Hence less 12% amount in the total amount of project cost i.e., 12% of Rs.20,34,487/- comes to Rs.4,66,099/-. Hence the complainants are entitle for Rs.4,66,099/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of respective payments. In addition to that, the complainants are also entitled for Rs.50,000/- compensation for mental agony and inconvenience suffered. Further complainants also entitled for Rs.10,000/- litigation cost from the opposite parties. Hence we answer this point No.2 partly in affirmative.
16. POINT NO.3:- In view of the discussion made above, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
The complaint is allowed in part.
The opposite parties are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,66,099/- to the complainants with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of receipts of payments been made till realization.
Further opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainants.
The opposite parties shall comply the order within 30 days. In case, they fail to comply the order within the said period, the above said amount of Rs.60,000/- carries interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of order till realization.
Supply free copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of the pleading and evidence to the parties.
Applications pending, if any, stands disposed-of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open Commission on 28th Day of March, 2023)
- REKHA SAYANNAVAR) (RAJU K.S) (SHIVARAMA. K)
-
//ANNEXURE//
Witness examined for the complainant side:
Sri. Umesh Karanth, the complainant No.1 (PW-1) has filed his affidavit in the form of his evidence in chief.
Documents marked for the complainants side:
- Final booking agreement dt.18.12.2019 – EX.P.1
- Booking agreement dt.18.08.2020 – EX.P.2
- Monthly statement/account summary issued by TATA SBI debit card – EX.P.3
- Statement of account issued by City Bank – EX.P.4
- Monthly statement/account summary – EX.P.5
- Statement of account issued by HDFC – EX.P.6
- Office copy of legal notice dt.04.01.2022 – EX.P.7
- Reply dt.19.01.2022 – EX.P.8
- Office copy of termination of legal notice dt.12.03.2022 – EX.P.9
- Reply dt.19.01.2022 – Ex.P.10.
Witness examined for the opposite party side:
Documents marked for the Opposite Party side:
- REKHA SAYANNAVAR) (RAJU K.S) (SHIVARAMA. K)
-
