SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

K. SURENDRA MOHAN, T. S. P. MOOSATH, BEENAKUMARY A.
P. C. Reghuthaman – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Kumar – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:George Cherian Karippaparambil and S. Reghukumar, Advocates

JUDGMENT

Beenakumary. A., Member—Appellants are the complainants and respondent is the opposite party before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ernakulam (in short the District Forum) in C.C. No. 819/2012.

2. Brief facts of the case are follows:

The complainants entered into a contract with the opposite party on 17.07.2012 for the construction of a building having an extent of 221.80 sq.m. as per permit No. 239/12, issued by N. Parur Municipality, at an agreed rate of Rs. 1000/- per square feet, making a total of Rs. 24,09,000/-for the construction of the whole building. The construction stared on 19.07.2012. The opposite party who undertook the construction work did not follow the covenants in the agreement. The pits taken for erecting the column and pillars were not having the required depth and the proportion of cement mortar used was substandard. The alignment of the structure of the building was irregular. The whole construction made so far, was deprived of technical expertise, affecting the stability of the building, and against the plan approved by the Municipality. The complainants had so far paid Rs. 3,27,000/- to the opposite party in advance. However the examinatio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top