The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kupwara, has allowed a complaint filed by a house owner against two contractors, a cement dealer and a cement manufacturer, holding that the construction work undertaken by the contractors was deficient and had caused damage to the complainant's residential house. The Commission relied on the findings of the R&B Department's technical assessment while granting relief to the complainant.

Facts

The complainant, Ghulam Mohidin Wani, owned land at Trehgam, Kupwara, where he planned to construct a residential house. After obtaining the required permission, OP Nos. 1 and 2 undertook the construction work and provided him a list of construction materials, including Arco-brand cement. The complainant purchased the cement from OP No. 3, Najjar Trading Company, manufactured/supplied by OP No. 4, Dawar Cements Pvt. Ltd.

After completion of the construction, cracks developed in the building's slab, allegedly making the house unsafe for habitation. The complainant approached the opposite parties for redressal, but alleged that they failed to resolve the issue, leading him to file a consumer complaint alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

During the proceedings, OP Nos. 1–3 failed to file their responses and were proceeded ex parte, while OP No. 4 denied the allegations and claimed that the cement was of standard quality. The R&B Department, Kupwara, inspected the house and assessed the damage at ₹4,04,943.

Observation and Decision

The Commission observed that OP Nos. 1 and 2, having undertaken the construction work, were responsible not only for execution of the work but also for ensuring the quality and standard of the materials used. The Commission found that the construction was deficient and that the complainant had suffered substantial damage to his house. It relied upon the R&B Department's technical report, which assessed the loss at ₹4,04,943.

The Commission also noted that the opposite parties failed to produce cogent evidence to rebut the complainant's allegations or establish that the damage was caused by any intervening circumstance attributable to the complainant.

Accordingly, the complaint was allowed. OP Nos. 3 and 4 were directed to pay ₹4,04,943 towards the loss caused due to the use of alleged sub-standard cement. OP Nos. 1 to 4 were jointly and severally directed to pay ₹2 lakh as compensation for inconvenience and agony and ₹30,000 towards litigation costs.The amount was to be paid within 30 days, failing which it would carry 5% annual interest until realization.

Case Title: Ghulam Mohidin Wani v. Ghulam Mohd Shah & Ors.

Case No.: CC/65/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order