The main legal point established in the judgment is that the consumer has the right to seek redress for deficiency in service, and the burden of proof lies with the parties to establish their claims.

JUDGMENT

P.S. Rana, (R) President

1. Appeal No.300/2016 & Appeal No.313/2016 filed against the same order passed by learned District Forum in consumer complaint No.170/2014 title Amar Chand Versus Subhash Chand. Both appeals are consolidated for disposal in order to avoid conflicting orders.

Brief facts of consumer complaint:

2. Sh. Amar Chand filed consumer complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 pleaded therein that complainant and opposite party executed an agreement dated 30.10.2013 for the construction of cemented retaining wall approximately 50 feet in length and 09 feet in height. It is pleaded that opposite party agreed that opposite party would construct the RCC pillar wall. It is further pleaded that rate was fixed at Rs.90/-(Ninety) per square feet and amount was to be paid in three installments. It is pleaded that first installment was to be paid at the time of starting of work and second installment was to be paid after completion of half work and remaining amount was to be paid after the completion of whole construction work. It is further pleaded that complainant supplied construction material to opposite party. It is pleaded that opposite party did not construct the retaining wall properly and cracks developed in the retaining wall. It is pleaded that complainant sustained loss to the tune of Rs.294000/-(Two lac ninety four thousand). It is further pleaded that complainant issued legal notice to opposite party. Complainant sought relief of payment of Rs.294000/-(Two lac ninety four thousand).

3. Per contra version filed on behalf of opposite party pleaded therein that complaint is legally and factually not maintainable. It is pleaded that complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the consumer complaint. It is further pleaded that complainant is estopped by his own act, conduct and acquiescence to file the consumer complaint. It is pleaded that consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the controversy inter se parties.

It is further pleaded that opposite party did not commit any deficiency in service and complainant has suppressed material facts from the Forum. It is pleaded that opposite party constructed the retaining wall and total labour expenses came to Rs.175000/-(One lac seventy five thousand). It is further pleaded that complainant did not pay balance amount of Rs.150000/-(One lac fifty thousand) to opposite party. It is pleaded that opposite party engaged three masons and nine labourers to execute the construction work. It is pleaded that opposite party constructed retaining wall as per dimension, instructions and directions to opposite party by complainant.

It is further pleaded that cracks if any appeared in the retaining wall were due to supply of inferior quality of construction material by complainant to opposite party. It is further pleaded that complainant has not paid labour charges to opposite party and opposite party did not commit any deficiency in service. Prayer for dismissal of consumer complaint sought.

4. Complainant filed rejoinder and reasserted the allegations mentioned in the complaint. Learned District Forum ordered opposite party to pay Rs.71500/-(Seventy one thousand five hundred) so as to enable complainant to repair the retaining wall. Learned District Forum further ordered that opposite party would pay the amount within 30 days from the order failing which it would carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of complaint till actual payment. Learned District Forum further ordered that opposite party would pay Rs.8000/-(Eight thousand) as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.3000/-(Three thousand) on account of litigation costs. Feeling aggrieved against the order passed by learned District Forum complainant Amar Chand filed appeal No.300/2016 and opposite party Subhash Chand filed appeal No.313/2016 before H.P. State Commission.

5. We have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of parties and we have also perused entire recor