BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAUD : THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PRESENT

SRI.  P.V. JAYARAJAN                               : PRESIDENT

SMT. PREETHA G. NAIR                           : MEMBER

SRI. VIJU  V.R.                                             : MEMBER

C.C.No. 256/2019  Filed on 13/08/2019

ORDER DATED: 30/04/2022

ORDER

SRI.P.V. JAYARAJAN, PRESIDENT:

1. This is a complaint filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 and the matter stood over to this date for consideration.  After hearing the matter the commission passed an order as follows:
2. The case of the complainant in short is that on seeing the advertisement in the news paper the complainant entrusted the work for laying sheet to the roof top of his 10 year old residential building with the opposite party.  Accordingly the opposite party came to the residential house of the complainant and measured the terrace area for the purpose of laying the roof top sheet.  The opposite party has assured that he will use the best quality materials and also stated that the work will be done by considering the wind flow of the area.  Subcequently the opposite party issued a quotation showing the rate of the materials etc.  On the basis of that quotation the complainant entrusted the work with the opposite party.  As per the understanding, the opposite party has agreed to complete the work before approaching monsoon season.  Though the opposite party unloaded ¼ of the materials required for the work in the month of May 2019 itself, there was delay on the part of the opposite party in proceedings with the work after so many days they could complete only the 10% of the sheet laying work and 60% of the structure work were completed.  Subsequent to that the opposite party not turned up to complete the work.  After that again work started and within 2 days they have competed 80% work and the pillars were just fixed there with angle bolts and hence the pillars were not fixed with stable materials.  During the monsoon season almost all the pillars were in a slanding position as a result of which damages were caused to the existing building also.  Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party the complainant approached this Commission for redressing his grievances.  After admitting the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party.  As the notice issued by this Commission was returned unclaimed, on 19/09/2019 the opposite party was called absent and set ex parte.
3. The evidence in this case consists of PW1 and Ext.P1 to P4 on the side of the complainant and the expert commission report was marked as Ext.C1.  The opposite party being declared ex parte, there is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party.  
4. Points to be considered:

(i). Whether there is any deficiency in service and unfair trade

practice on the part of the Opposite Parties?

(ii). Whether the complainant is entitle to the relief claimed in the

(iii). Order as to cost?

5. Heard.  Perused records and affidavit.  To substantiate the case of the complainant the complainant has filed an application to appoint an expert commissioner to note and report about the conditions of the work undertaken by the opposite party and other matters.  This Commission allowed that application and Mr.P.K.Ramesh was appointed as expert commissioner to note and report about the points mentioned in the Commission application.  To prove the case of the complainant, the complainant himself sworn an affidavit as PW1 and Ext.P1 to P4 were marked.  The expert commission report was marked as Ext.C1.  Ext.P1 is the copy of Quotation dated 09/05/2019.  Ext.P2 series are the copy of whats app messages.  Ext.P3 series are the original photos.  Ext.P4 is the copy of advertisement in newspaper.  The Expert Commissioner appointed by this Commission has filed Ext.C1 report before this Commission with observation that an amount of Rs.44,439/- is the estimated cost for strengthening the structure and reconstruction of the damaged parapet works of the residential building of the complainant.  We find that the complainant has substantiated his case against the opposite party by swearing the affidavit as PW1 and also by producing and marking Ext.P1 to P4.  The Ext.C1 expert commission report also strengthens the case of the complainant against the opposite party.  As there is no oral or documentary evidence from the side of the opposite party, the evidence adduced by the complainant is unshaken and stands unchallenged.  In the above circumstances we accept the evidence adduced by the complainant in the absence of any contra  evidence from the side of the opposite party.  From the available evidence, we find that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  The complainant has suffered metal agony and financial loss due to the deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party.  Hence we find that the opposite party is liable to compensate the loss suffered by the complainant.  In view of the above discussion we find that this is a fit case to be allowed in favour of the complainant.
6. In the result the complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.44,439/- (Rupees Forty Four Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty Nine Only) with 6% interest along with Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as compensation and Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred Only) being the cost of this proceedings to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the amount except cost shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order till the date of realization/remittance.                  

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Court, this the 30^th  day of April,  2022.

C.C. No. 256/2019

APPENDIX

1. COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

2. COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

3. OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

4. OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

5. COURT EXHIBIT:

                                                                                                                            Sd/-

                                                                                                                   PRESIDENT