Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu,  President.

1.       The   complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (as amended upto date) on the allegations that he wanted to get install steel railing for staircase and steel gate of his house and for this purpose, he contacted the Opposite Parties who are doing the work of manufacturing and installing steel gates and stairs railing and the complainant shown the Opposite Parties the main gate of house of his neighbour and asked to fabricate/ manufacture and install similar steel gate in sliding shape and at this, the Opposite Party  told that they will manufacture much more durable and beautiful gate than the gate of neighbour of the complainant and the rate was fixed @ Rs.140/- per Kg besides Rs.160/- per Kg  on account of labour charges total amounting to Rs.300/- per Kg. It was also settled that the complainant will have to purchase Cladding Sheet (fundermix sheets) and same will also be installed in the main gate and there will be no charges for weight of the said sheets. As per the demand, the complainant paid Rs.30,000/- in advance to the Opposite Parties for the said purpose i.e.Rs.20,000/- paid on 24.06.2020 and Rs.10,000/- on 08.07.2020. Further alleges that as per the instructions of the Opposite Parties, the complainant purchased 2 Cladding sheets (fundermix sheets) of size 8’x4’ (total 64’) for total Rs.15,680/- from Bansal Trading Company, Moga vide bill No. 398 dated 03.07.2020. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties manufactured the steel gate  and installed at the main entrance of the house of the complainant, but the complainant stunned to note that the Opposite Parties have prepared the gate in reverse side which looks very ugly and defective. Photographs of the gate are enclosed herewith. Photographs clearly shows that said gate has been manufactured by some incompetent person and there are number of defects in the gate, there is no steel work on front side of the gate, rather entire steel work is on the back side of the gate which can only be visible only if one enters the house and the gate is lying closed.  There are many manufacturing defects in the said gate. The fundermix sheets were to be cut in pieces and same were to be affixed in between steel bars, whereas the Opposite Parties have installed full pieces of the said sheets without cutting it and without installing it in between the steel bars. In this way, the said steel gate is total wastage of steel bars. There is much gap between joining of two cladding sheets which also creates a ugly look to the said gate. The bearings/ wheels under the said steel gate are defective one and cause much noise while opening and closing the said gate. The cladding sheets are not properly cut and affixed in the border steel bars and there is much gap between the sheets and steel bars which shows that the said gate has been manufactured by some incompetent person. Thereafter, the complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties  to prepare the steel gate as per the instructions made by the complainant or to refund the entire money given by the complainant, but the Opposite Parties refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant.  Due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite Party, the complainant suffered huge mental tension, harassment and loss of reputation. Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. Due to the aforesaid illegal and unwarranted acts, the complainant suffered a lot. Vide instant  complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)    To direct the Opposite Party to refund the amount of Rs.30,000/- which was paid by the complainant to the Opposite Parties as advance for manufacturing the main gate and railing for staircase and also directed to make the payment of Rs.15,680/- as costs of cladding sheets (fundermix sheets) which has been wasted by the Opposite Parties  and also to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation for causing mental tension, harassment and deficient service besides Rs.12,000/- as costs of litigation or any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission,  may deem fit be granted.

Hence, the present complaint is filed by the Complainant  for the redressal of her grievances.

2.       On notice,  Opposite Parties  appeared through counsel and contested the complaint  by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is  not maintainable; that  the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint;  that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous.  In fact, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Opposite Parties were facing the problem of shortage of labour and  they were not in a position to accomplish the work of a new gate before 15.08.2020,but the complainant wanted the gate before 10.07.2020 and due to this reason, the Opposite Parties refused to manufacture his steel gate. On the request of the complainant, the Opposite Parties referred the name of Gurmail Singh of M/s.Guru Nanak Railing Works, Moga and thereafter, the complainant left the shop of the Opposite Party and after few days the complainant again visited the shop of the Opposite Parties and created a scene that you both are untrained person for the manufacturing of his steel gate and the gate was not working properly and due to the old relations with the complainant, Opposite Party No.1 personally visited the house of the complainant and checked the gate and it was working properly and he did not find any defect in the gate. Then, the complainant replied that his family is not happy with the design of the gate and  asked to Gurmail Singh to prepare a new gate to which Opposite Party No.1 did not accede to the superfluous request of the complainant. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and as such, the complainant is not entitled to any relief from this District Consumer Commission and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. On merits, the Opposite Parties took up the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and hence, it is prayed that the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed.  

3.       In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his  affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.A7 and  closed his evidence.

4.       On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties also tendered  into evidence affidavit of Sh.Sunil Kumar Ex.OP1 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties. 

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant as well as Sh.Sunil Kumar Opposite Party No.1 and also gone through the documents placed on record.

6.       Ld.counsel for the Complainant has  mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and contended that  the complainant wanted to get install steel railing for staircase and steel gate of his house and for this purpose, he contacted the Opposite Parties who are doing the work of manufacturing and installing steel gates and stairs railing and the complainant shown the Opposite Parties the main gate of house of his neighbour and asked to fabricate/ manufacture and install similar steel gate in sliding shape and at this, the Opposite Party  told that they will manufacture much more durable and beautiful gate than the gate of neighbour of the complainant and the rate was fixed @ Rs.140/- per Kg besides Rs.160/- per Kg  on account of labour charges total amounting to Rs.300/- per Kg. It was also settled that the complainant will have to purchase Cladding Sheet (fundermix sheets) and same will also be installed in the main gate and there will be no charges for weight of the said sheets. As per the demand, the complainant paid Rs.30,000/- in advance to the Opposite Parties for the said purpose i.e.Rs.20,000/- paid on 24.06.2020 and Rs.10,000/- on 08.07.2020. Further alleges that as per the instructions of the Opposite Parties, the complainant purchased 2 Cladding sheets (fundermix sheets) of size 8’x4’ (total 64’) for total Rs.15,680/- from Bansal Trading Company, Moga vide bill No. 398 dated 03.07.2020. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties manufactured the steel gate  and installed at the main entrance of the house of the complainant, but the complainant stunned to note that the Opposite Parties have prepared the gate in reverse side which looks very ugly and defective. Photographs of the gate are enclosed herewith. Photographs clearly shows that said gate has been manufactured by some incompetent person and there are number of defects in the gate, there is no steel work on front side of the gate, rather entire steel work is on the back side of the gate which can only be visible only if one enters the house and the gate is lying closed.  There are many manufacturing defects in the said gate. The fundermix sheets were to be cut in pieces and same were to be affixed in between steel bars, whereas the Opposite Parties have installed full pieces of the said sheets without cutting it and without installing it in between the steel bars. In this way, the said steel gate is total wastage of steel bars. There is much gap between joining of two cladding sheets which also creates a ugly look to the said gate. The bearings/ wheels under the said steel gate are defective one and cause much noise while opening and closing the said gate. The cladding sheets are not properly cut and affixed in the border steel bars and there is much gap between the sheets and steel bars which shows that the said gate has been manufactured by some incompetent person. Thereafter, the complainant made so many requests to the Opposite Parties  to prepare the steel gate as per the instructions made by the complainant or to refund the entire money given by the complainant, but the Opposite Parties refused to admit the rightful claim of the complainant. To  support his aforesaid contentions, the complainant has placed on record his duly sworn afidavits Ex.C1 and Ex.C8 alongwith copy of bill for purchase of Cladding Sheet  worth Rs.15,680/- Ex.C2, photographs of steel gate Ex.C3 to Ex.C6, counsel fee bill receipt Ex.C7 and copy of receipt of advance payment received by the Opposite Parties and hence, prayed for redressal of his grievances.

7.       On the other hand, Opposite Party No.1 has repelled the aforesaid contention of the complainant and contended that in fact, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Opposite Parties were facing the problem of shortage of labour and  they were not in a position to accomplish the work of a new gate before 15.08.2020,but the complainant wanted the gate before 10.07.2020 and due to this reason, the Opposite Parties refused to manufacture his steel gate. On the request of the complainant, the Opposite Parties referred the name of Gurmail Singh of M/s.Guru Nanak Railing Works, Moga and thereafter, the complainant left the shop of the Opposite Party and after few days the complainant again visited the shop of the Opposite Parties and created a scene that you both are untrained person for the manufacturing of his steel gate and the gate was not working properly and due to the old relations with the complainant, Opposite Party No.1 personally visited the house of the complainant and checked the gate and it was working properly and he did not find any defect in the gate. Then, the complainant replied that his family is not happy with the design of the gate and  asked to Gurmail Singh to prepare a new gate to which Opposite Party No.1 did not accede to the superfluous request of the complainant and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.

8.       Perusal of the record as well as photographs produced by the complainant Ex.C2 to Ex.C6  of the steel gate shows that the  gate is installed in reverse side which looks bad and defective. It appears that said gate has been manufactured by some incompetent person. Furthermore, there is no steel work on front side of the gate, rather entire steel work is on the back side of the gate which can only be visible from the photographs from infer side of the house. The aforesaid version of the complainant has nowhere denied by the Opposite Parties by producing any cogent and convincing evidence to defend his case. Furthermore, the complainant has also produced the receipt on record on which the advance payment receipt of Rs.30,000/- is written and this receipt of advance amount has nowhere denied by the Opposite Parties, rather Opposite Party No.1 at the time of  arguments could not  give any satisfactory reply to this receipt of payment of Rs.30,000/- from the complainant. As such, the version of the complainant with regard to defects while preparing the main steel gate is admitted as correct.   To make good the loss occasioned at the hands of the Opposite Parties by the complainant, the complainant has prayed for compensation amounting to Rs.50,000/-, but so far as compensation regarding deficiency in service as well as mental agony and harassment to the complainant is concerned,  the complainant has claimed Rs.50,000/- besides Rs.12,000/- as costs of litigation. It is settled principle of law that no exorbitant compensation can  be awarded to enrich a party at the cost of the other party. Therefore, the claim of the complainant for grant of hefty amount as compensation, is not tenable. In our considered opinion, the complainant is entitled to  compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousands only).

9.       In view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we direct the Opposite Parties jointly or severally to make the lump sum compensation to the Complainant  amounting to Rs.10,000/- (ten thousands only)  on account of mental tension and harassment as well as litigation expenses alongwith  interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 18.08.2020  till its  realisation.  The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Party   within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant  shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this District Commission. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

10.     Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:08.03.2022.