VIJAY UIKE Vs. SUDESH KUMAR ARKATKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 31.3.2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rajnandgaon (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in Complaint Case No. 62/2006, where by the complaint has been dismissed.

(2.) AS per averments of the complaint, the complainant decided to renovate his old building and handed over 11.45 c.ft. Teak and 12.63 c.ft. Beeja Wood, which was earlier used in the old building, to the OPs for being used for making furniture, reception counter and for being used in operation theatre of the complainant's clinic. As per complaint, the OPs used inferior quality of wood instead of Teak and Beeja Wood given to them and very small quantity of the wood of good quality, handed over by the complainant, was used in the clinic. The OPs had not done away with nearly 8 c.ft. Teak and Beeja Wood. The OPs also charged for Sarai Wood, used in the wood work. As per the complaint, the complainant had handed over good quality of wood of about Rs. 18,850 and the OPs also charged excessive labour charges. Hence being aggrieved, after service of legal notice, the complainant approached the District Forum.

(3.) SIMILAR defence was taken by both OPs and they denied their relationship With M/s. Vakratund Furniture Mart, Rajnandgaon. Besides denying other averments of the complaint, they totally denied that they had undertaken any work relating to furnishing of the complainant's clinic. Neither they had received any wood from the complainant, nor they had received any labour charges and nor they committed any deficiency in service. It was averred in the written version that the complainant has filed the complaint in order to avoid payment to M/s. Vakratund Furniture. Compensatory cost was demanded by the OPs.