New house left ‘incomplete and leaking’, Kerala man wins Rs 40,000 from contractor

“It is true that the construction work was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic and hence there was a possibility of completion of the work in time. Anyway, there was some delay in completion of the work, which is evident from the expert commission report,” the bench stated.

The complainant was entrusted by his brother, who resides in the US, with constructing a house at Vythiri in Wayanad. After the first contractor abandoned the work, the complainant claimed to have entered into an agreement with another contractor on August 5, 2019, for completing the construction for Rs 37.25 lakh within six months.

The complainant alleged that despite paying Rs 34.52 lakh, the contractor stopped the work without completing it and left several defects. He claimed that Rs 5.35 lakh had been received in excess, while further expenditure was required to complete the house and fix a ceiling leakage. The complainant claimed he had paid Rs 34.52 lakh, while only Rs 2.50 lakh remained payable under the agreement.

An expert assessment indicated that Rs 7.86 lakh was required to complete the remaining work, while the complainant’s brother ultimately spent around Rs 10 lakh to complete it. He therefore approached the district consumer commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

Contractor blamed faulty earlier construction

The contractor denied receiving the amount claimed by the complainant and disputed the allegations. He argued that the previous contractor had carried out faulty construction and that the ground floor dimensions differed from the approved plan, creating difficulties in completing the remaining work.

He claimed the complainant had repeatedly altered the plans, materials and designs, requiring additional work and increasing construction costs. According to the contractor, he had incurred Rs 4,46,800 in additional expenses for work outside the original agreement at the complainant’s request.

He further claimed that the complainant himself stopped the construction due to lack of funds, and that the contractor had been ready to continue the work. He sought dismissal of the complaint, alleging that it was false and intended to avoid payment allegedly due to him.

Expert report flags defects: Order

The commission noted that the complainant had initially engaged another contractor, who left the construction incomplete. The remaining work was later entrusted to the said contractor (opposite party) under an agreement dated August 5, 2019, for Rs 37.25 lakh, with a six-month completion period.

It observed that the construction took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which could have affected the timeline. The commission also found that the delay was not solely attributable to the contractor, as the evidence indicated that the previous contractor had caused problems and the work had been temporarily stopped.

Noting that the expert report identified construction defects, including deterioration in portions of the gypsum ceiling and water leakage between the roof slab and wall, the commission held that these defects amounted to a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by the contractor. The commission ordered the contractor to pay Rs 40,000 in compensation and litigation costs.

Takeaway

The judgment confirms that defective construction can constitute a deficiency in service under consumer law. It highlights the importance of expert evidence in proving construction defects, while showing that unsubstantiated claims for incomplete work or excess payment may fail.

Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Kerala: 1800-425-1550) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Don’t miss out on these stories:

Man sold ‘insurance policy’ instead of FD from wife’s cancer fund, wins Rs 1.5 lakh

Selling ‘expired’ cosmetics costs seller Rs 15,000 after Kerala woman wins case

Telangana man orders ‘golden’ sofa legs gets ‘steel-coloured’ ones, wins Rs 25,000 payout