1. Khawaja Nasir Mehmood S/o Mehmood Sultan Caste Kashmiri R/o Ratta Road, Gujranwala has filed this complaint against Muhammad Jameel S/o Khushi Muhammad under section 25 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005. Case of the complainant is that he entered into a contract with respondent who is a Masson for construction of his house situated at Wapda Town Gujranwala at Rs. 116/- per Sq.Ft. The agreement was executed in the presence of witnesses. According to this agreement it was settled that electricity work, Labour charges, shuttering material, iron, and wiring of electricity, Sui Gas, drinking water and sewerage shall also be the responsibility of respondent. It was further agreed that construction of house shall be completed within the period of 8/9 months.
2. According to the complainant, respondent started construction of the house negligently and provided deficient services he received Rs. 50000/- in advance but did not complete his job causing substantial loss of Rs. 150000/- to the complainant. According to the complainant respondent was asked to remove the defect in the construction work but he has not done so.
3. Respondent was summoned who, inspite of, due service did not choose to appear therefore, he was proceeded exparte. The complainant appeared as PW1 in support of his claim and produced Muhammad Shafi as PW2. He also produced Exhibit "P1" receipt showing payment to respondent.
4. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
5. Complainant has not mentioned the time and date when he entered into the agreement with the respondent for the construction of his house. According to the complainant the agreement was executed in the presence of witnesses in which certain terms and conditions regarding construction of the house were settled between the parties but the complainant had not brought on the record either the original agreement or copy thereof, in absence of which the details of the work agreed between the parties can not be unearthed. The date of agreement, the period for execution of agreement, the details and specification of work and other terms and conditions can not be ascertained from the evidence available on record. Complainant has failed to bring on record the nature of defect in the construction caused by the respondent. He has not produced any expert who has inspected the house and noticed the short comings or assessed the value of the unfinished work as alleged by the complainant. There is no evidence on the record as to the incomplete and unfinished construction work by the respondent. In the absence of any expert evidence neither the defects in the construction of house can be determined nor the damages due to the defects caused by the respondent can be evaluated. The legal notice, the mandatory requirements, has not been produced in the evidence, no postal receipt showing that the legal notice was dispatched to the respondent has been exhibited on the record. The main stress of the complainant during the evidence remained on recovery of Rs. 50000/- from the respondent. In the absence of any cogent evidence the complaint can not be accepted. When the agreement was executed between the parties, when the construction of house was started and when the respondent left the construction unfinished and when the legal notice was served is unascertainable facts from the complaint as well as from the evidence. The up short of discussion is that complainant has failed to prove his case, therefore, the complaint is dismissed. File be consigned to the record room after its due completion.