Mohali, Oct. 20 -- The district consumer disputes redressal commission directed SS Builders Mohali to refund Rs.6 lakh to a woman, noting that the firm accepted the amount for constructing a two-storey building for her clinic-cum-health centre at Wave Estate, Sector 85, but failed to even start the work. The commission, comprising president SK Aggarwal and member Paramjeet Kaur, directed the builder to refund the amount with 9% annual interest from the respective dates of payment. It also ordered the builder to pay Rs.30,000 as compensation for harassment, inconvenience, and litigation expenses. The complainant, Maninder Kaur, wife of Navjot Singh Gandhi and a resident of Phase 11, said she approached builder Jagdeep Singh Somal, proprietor of SS Builders Mohali, to construct a two-storey building on her plot, SCO 13, in Wave Estate. She intended to use the premises as a clinic-cum-health centre for her livelihood. According to her complaint, the parties entered into an oral arrangement on June 5, 2023, and she paid Rs.3 lakh as advance in two instalments of Rs.1.5 lakh each. The builder issued a receipt for the amount. She subsequently paid another Rs.3 lakh and received a second receipt. On June 13, 2023, the parties signed a quotation setting out the terms and conditions for construction at an estimated cost of Rs.44 lakh. Maninder alleged that the builder did not start work despite receiving Rs.6 lakh. He initially cited a shortage of labour, but the construction did not begin despite her repeated requests. She approached the consumer commission seeking a refund with 12% annual interest, Rs.3 lakh for mental agony and harassment, and Rs.50,000 towards litigation expenses. The builder denied receiving the entire amount and disputed the authenticity of the receipts. He claimed that one receipt was forged and argued that the signed document was only a quotation, not a construction agreement. The builder also told the commission that the plot required repairs and chemical treatment because water had accumulated at the site. He claimed to have spent money on materials and equipment. He further alleged that the complainant had a financial dispute with a previous builder, who had refused to allow further construction or issue a no-objection certificate until his alleged dues were cleared. The commission examined the receipts and the signed quotation and held that the documents, read together, established the construction arrangement and payment of Rs.6 lakh to the builder....