##PAGE1##

ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH Date of Institution : 21.03.2023 Date of Reserve : 11.08.2026 Date of Decision : 07.09.2026 Mr.Sunil Sharma S/o Shri Satya Nand Sharma R/o Toor Colony, Saloh Road, Nawanshahr, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar

134117.

….Appellant/Complainant Versus Amarnath S/o Balwant R/o Gujjarpur Kalan, Tehsil Nawanshahr, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar +91-98884 56553 ….Respondent/Opposite party First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 21.02.2023 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SBS Nagar.

Quorum:-

Mr.Harinderpal Singh Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs.Kiran Sibal, Member Present:-

For the appellant : Ms.Niharika Mittal, Advocate For the respondent : Sh.Chandan Gulati, Advocate HARINDERPAL SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant- Sunil Sharma, against the order dated 21.02.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SBS Nagar (in short ‘District Commission’), whereby the complaint filed by the complainant under the Consumer Protection Act (in short ‘the Act’) was disposed of with no order as to costs. The District Commission given the liberty to the complainant to approach any appropriate court of competent jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance.

It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

2. Briefly stated facts of the complaint are that the opposite party was given contract for Rs.90,717/- for the residential kothi of the complainant for his own use and occupation. The list of items, area and price was agreed between both the parties. The complainant paid an advance of Rs.57,000/-; out of which Rs.52,000/- was given at one instance and Rs.5,000/- was given when opposite party called a panchayat and decided the terms of completing work. It is submitted that the opposite party left the work incomplete despite of the fact they were called several times to complete the same. Also a whatsapp message was also delivered to them on 23.07.2022 but no reply was received. It is also submitted that the workers of opposite party broke the new times and put water on 14 cement bags rendering them unusable, damaged kitchen sink, broke slabs, applied unlevelled tiles etc. Thereafter, the contract for completing the remaining work was given to another contactor for a total consideration of Rs.67,000/-, which was paid in two parts. The complainant also sent a legal notice dated 17.10.2022 calling upon the opposite party to make the payment of Rs.1,31,043/- being the damages caused by the opposite party but they never cared to respond back. Due to this act and conduct of the opposite party, the complainant suffered a lot and was compelled to approach the District Commission by filing the present complaint seeking following reliefs:

i) to make the payment of Rs.1,31,043/- being damages caused by along with interest from 23.07.2022 at the rate of 12% interest per annum till the actual realization of the amount;

ii) to pay Rs.34,000/- as extra amount paid to the new contractor along with interest from 22.08.2022 @12%

per annum along with damages; and iii) to pay Rs.50,000/- at least being compensation for mental agony, suffering and litigation expenses;.

3. Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed its written reply taking preliminary objections that the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint and has suppressed the material facts from the Court. On merits, it is submitted that the respondent is do the work on a labour rate. The respondent is an uneducated person and the complainant got signatures of the respondent on some blank papers. The respondent did the work for Rs.1,62,000/-, however, the complainant paid only Rs.55,000/- and Rs.1,07,000/- is due towards the complainant. When th