By. Smt. Bindu. R, President:

            This complaint is filed Anuram. K. P, S/o. Parasuraman, Krishnagiri House, Cheeral Post, Wayanad Represented by Power of Attorney Agent Pratheesh. P. B, S/o. Balakrishnan, Ponnakath House, Nambiarkunnu, Cheeral Post, Wayanad against The Manager, PCI Pest control Private Limited,    24/987-1, 2^nd Floor, M. K. Building, Kalloor Road Junction, Mankavu Post, Kozhikode-7  as Opposite Party alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of the Opposite Party.

            2.  The Complainant states that he had constructed a house of 5500 square feet which is numbered as NP XII/646B by Nenmeni Panchayath.  The structural work was done by Ramjith Associates which is a reputed construction company in Kerala.  The Complainant had invested a total amount of Rs.6 crores for the construction of the building.  The Complainant states that the representatives of the Opposite Party approached the Complainant during the time of construction of the building and canvassed for the service named “Termiseal service” (TSPR) stating and assuring that if the product is used for construction, there will not be termite nuisance.  Believing the words of the representatives of the Opposite Party, the Complainant paid Rs.30,000/- for getting the service of Opposite Party and Termiseal Service (TSPR) was given to the Complainant by the Opposite Party and the remaining construction was done in accordance with the direction of the Opposite Party.  According to the Complainant the Opposite Party offered 10 year warranty and had given certificate of warranty from 22.11.2017 to 21.11.2027.  The Complainant had purchased costly furniture and made panel work after the construction of the house believing the words of the Opposite Party.  Flooring was also done using costly wood on the basis of the assurance given by the Opposite Party.  The Complainant states that he had started living in the building on the assurance given by the Opposite Party but the termite was affected within two years and panelling were also destroyed by the termite. According to the Complainant the same was happened due to the deficiency of service from the side of the Opposite Party for which the Opposite Party is liable and hence the complaint praying for issuing a direction to the Opposite Party to pay an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs towards compensation along with other reliefs.

            3.  Even though notice was accepted by the Opposite Party, he had neither entered in to appearance nor filed version in the case.  Hence Opposite Party was set ex-parte.

            4.  Evidence in this case consists of Chief affidavit of the Power of Attorney Holder of the Complainant and Exts.A1 to A4 from the side of the Complainant.  The Commission Report is marked as Ext.C1.

            5.  The following are the questions to be analysed in this case to derive into an inference of the facts.

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the side of the Opposite Party.
2. If proved, Compensation and costs for which the Complainant is entitled for.

6.  In this case Ext.A1 is the Warranty Certificate which shows that there is a warranty of 10 years from 22.11.2017 to 21.11.2027.  Receipts are also given by the Opposite Party with reference to the payment made by the Complainant.  Expert Commissioner appointed in this case had filed report along with photographs which shows termite attack in some portion.

7.  Even after accepting the notice from the Commission, the Opposite Party did not appear before the Commission and filed their version with reference to the complaint and hence the Commission evaluated the merit of the complaint on the basis of the documents and the statements in the complaint and with reference to the report of the Commissioner along with other documents.

8.  On overall consideration of the evidence in this case the Commission finds that the Complainant had proved Point No.1 in his favour and hence the following orders are passed

1. The Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) to the Complainant towards compensation for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of the Opposite Party.
2. The Opposite Party is also liable to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) towards cost of proceedings.

Needless to say that the above ordered amount are to be paid by the Opposite Party within 30 days of receipt of copy of the Order, otherwise the Opposite Party will be liable to pay interest @ 6% per annum for the amount awarded as compensation from the date of complaint till date of realization.

Consumer Case is allowed accordingly.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 18^th day of December 2024.

Date of Filing:- 18.07.2024.

PRESIDENT   : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

MEMBER       : Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant:-

PW1.              Pratheesh. P. B.                                          Agriculture.

Witness for the Opposite Party:-

Nil.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1.                  Copy of Warranty Certificate.                            Dt:04.12.2017.

A2.                  Copy of Invoice.                                                     Dt:24.11.2017.

A3.                  Copy of Receipt.                                                     Dt:30.11.2017.

A4.                  Power of Attorney.                                              

C1.                  Commission Report.                                              Dt:13.09.2024.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-

            Nil.

PRESIDENT   :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

MEMBER       :Sd/-

/True Copy/

Sd/-

                                                                                             ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                                                                  CDRC, WAYANAD.

Kv/-