A construction agreement for a residential dwelling constitutes a 'service' under the Consumer Protection Act, and the failure of a contractor to complete work as per specifications despite receiving full consideration amounts to a deficiency in service, requiring refund of unearned amounts and compensation for mental agony.

JUDGMENT

(By Tmt. S.OUMASANGUERY, Member)

This complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party seeking redressal for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and an order directing the opposite party

(a) To return and refund the amount of Rs.18,77,360/- retained by the opposite party in excess with interest of 18% p.a. from October 2012 till date of payment in full quits to enable the complainant to complete the construction.

(b) To pay compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for delay, deficiency and damage with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from January 2014 to the date of payment in full quits,

(c) To pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, physical strain and stress and loss of value of the property with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from June 2015 till date of payment in full quits,

(d) . To award Rs.5,00,000/- towards litigation costs.

Facts in brief:

2. The case of the complainant's that she is absolute owner of the property at plot no.46, Ramalinga Nagar (RLN), Puducherry and plot at Chinnairusapallayam (CIP) Village, Ariyankuppam, Puducherry. The present complaint pertains to the construction of residential building at Ramalinga Nagar (RLN) (fully described in the schedule to complaint). Her husband is a retired Deputy General Manager of Indian Oil Corporation, invested his settlement and PF savings funds for the construction of a residential house in the property. The complainant states that having no prior acquaintance with reliable civil contractors, the complainant relied upon the representations made in the advertisement issued by the opposite party in the Ad Express Newspaper in April 2012, approached the opposite party for undertaking the construction of a residential building. Relying on the representations, assurances and promises of the opposite party regarding quality, timely completion and adherence to specification, the complainant and her husband executed a Construction Agreement dated 01.06.2012 for the construction of a two storied residential building measuring approximately 2650 sq.feet at a contract value of Rs.37,50,000/- to be completed within 12 months from the date of agreement. The complainant also states that the agreement provided a stage-wise payment plan, linking installment payments to completion of specific levels of completion. The building was to include underground and overhead tanks, septic tanks, soak pit, compound wall, balcony extensions, utility areas and canopy roof extensions as per the approved design. The construction agreement specifically detailed the plans, scope of work, materials to be used, workmanship standards and payment schedule.

3. The complainant submits that she and her husband in good faith and in accordance with the payment schedule made progressive payments to opposite party between June 2012 to October 2014 totalling to Rs.38,62,500/- exceeding even the agreed total cost of Rs.37,50,000/-. The payment were made as follows: