Dutta c. Management Build Canada Inc. 2015 QCCQ 4765 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-136241-124 DATE: May 26, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ UTPAL DUTTA and KAYA ROY-DUTTA Plaintiffs v.

MANAGEMENT BUILD CANADA INC. and HALDER SUDHABRATA Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] WHEREAS the Court granted plaintiffs' motion for revocation of judgment; [ 2 ] GIVEN the evidence, including the testimony of Mr. Utpal Dutta, Mr. Sudhabrata Halder of Management Build Canada Inc. and Mr.

Paco Brancaccio, general contractor, as well as exhibits P-1 to P-14 and D-1 to D-14; [ 3 ] WHEREAS plaintiffs did not fulfill their burden of proof (arts. 2803 and 2804 C.C.Q .); [ 4 ] WHEREAS , according to the preponderance of evidence, the alleged defects described by plaintiff Utpal Dutta at trial, were not attributable to defendant Management Build Canada Inc. ("Management") or its subcontractor; [ 5 ] WHEREAS , according to the preponderance of evidence, the work was carried out in accordance with usual practice and the rules of art, in conformity with the contract; [ 6 ] WHEREAS , furthermore, there is no lien de droit between plaintiffs and defendant Sudhabrata Halder, personally, as he is not party to the contract (exhibit D-1); [ 7 ] WHEREAS , since the institution of the proceedings, plaintiffs paid the outstanding amount owed to Management for its services ($2,433.68), and the matter of the legal hypothec was settled between the parties; [ 8 ] WHEREAS , with regards to Management's claims in the amounts of $1,000.00 "for the personal damages cause on his part

from the frustration and the harassment" (sic) and $2,000.00 for "the corporate damages caused due to loose of revenue, creditability and tighter budgets" (sic), the evidence is insufficient; WHEREFORE THE COURT HEREBY: DISMISSES plaintiffs' action; DISMISSES the cross-demand; Each party paying its own costs. __________________________________ ELIANA MARENGO, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: May 15, 2015