Defective house, inferior materials: Consumer panel orders builder to pay Rs 25 lakh

NEW DELHI: The Kollam district consumer commission has directed a Thiruvananthapuram-based builder to pay Rs 25 lakh to a man after finding that the residential house constructed for him had serious defects and used inferior materials. The commission also awarded Rs 20 lakh towards repair costs and damages. The order was passed on August 10, 2026. What was the dispute over the construction of the house?According to the commission order, Visakh K. had entered into an agreement with Luxury Builders, managed by Jayadevan M.V., on January 13, 2022, for construction of a residential house at Kalliyoor, Thiruvananthapuram. The agreed cost was Rs 32 lakh and the house was to be completed and handed over within six months. However, the construction was completed only on January 20, 2024, and the housewarming was held in January 2024. Visakh alleged that he ultimately paid Rs 42,63,450 to the builder, more than the amount mentioned in the agreement. He alleged that the builder had assured him of using quality materials, including branded bathroom fittings, paint, electrical wires, switches, plumbing materials and tiles. But soon after taking possession, he noticed several defects in the house. The complaint alleged leaking plumbing lines, defective sanitary fittings, peeling paint, cracks in walls and ceilings, uneven flooring, damaged kitchen cupboards, inferior door frames, water seepage through windows, leakage from the staircase pergola and problems with the electrical work. Visakh also said he had to spend money himself to complete some kitchen work after the builder failed to do so. Visakh made several oral and written requests to the builder seeking rectification of the defects, but alleged that no action was taken. He then approached the consumer commission seeking relief for the defective construction. The builder did not appear before the commission or file its version despite notice and was proceeded against ex parte. What did the commission find about the defects in the house?The bench comprising President S K Sreela and member Stanly Harold appointed an expert commissioner and an advocate commissioner to inspect the residential building. The expert report found inferior and substandard materials, defective plumbing, dampness and seepage, cracks in walls, inadequate waterproofing and improper slope in balcony tiling. It also found that the workmanship did not meet standard civil engineering practices. The advocate commissioner also found several defects during the inspection, including a collapsed portion of the concrete pathway, damaged washbasin fixtures, damaged kitchen cabinets, leaking bathroom pipes, inferior sanitary fittings, cracks and deterioration in the terrace concrete, peeling paint and dampness with algae formation on the walls. The expert report concluded that the construction was defective and substandard, that the materials used were inferior and that immediate rectification and replacement of defective works and materials was necessary. It also held the contractor responsible for the observed defects and deficiencies. “Based on my inspection, I conclude that: The construction work carried out is defective and substandard, Materials used are inferior and not in accordance with normal construction standards, Immediate rectification and replacement of defective works and materials is necessary, The contractor is responsible for the observed defects and deficiencies,” the expert report stated. The advocate commissioner similarly found that the damage to the concrete pathway, peeling paint, leakage in bathroom pipes, damaged cabinets, inferior sanitary fittings and deterioration of the terrace concrete were prima facie defects relating to the quality of construction. The commission said the builder had an obligation under the agreement to construct the residential building in proper condition. It found that the construction did not meet normal construction standards and that the builder had also collected an amount exceeding the sum mentioned in the agreement. “The opposite party had entered into an agreement with the complainant and perform the construction work not in accordance with the normal construction standards. The opposite party had under an obligation to perform the construction of the residential building in a perfect condition as per Exhibit P1 which the opposite party failed to do so,” the commission held. The commission relied on the expert report, which said immediate rectification and replacement of defective works and materials were necessary and that the contractor was responsible for the defects. It found that the builder's failure to fulfil its obligations amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. “As per Exhibit C1 immediate rectification and replacement of defective works and materials is necessary and the contractor is responsible for the observed defects and deficiencies. The nonfulfillment of the obligation on the side of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice,” the commission said. The commission therefore allowed the complaint and directed the builder to pay Rs 20 lakh towards the cost of necessary repairs and damages, with 9 percent annual interest from January 13, 2022, until realisation. It also awarded Rs 5 lakh as compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience caused by the defective construction and Rs 25,000 towards litigation costs. The builder was directed to comply with the order within 45 days of receiving a copy. If it fails to do so, the complainant can recover the entire amount with 9 percent annual interest and may initiate execution proceedings in accordance with law.