IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated, the 19th day of September, 2022.
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
C C No. 120/2022 (Filed on 07-06-2022)
Petitioner : Rameez @ Rameez Jabbar,
S/o C.S. Abdul Jabbar,
Chittadiyil House, Kooraly P.O.
Pin- 686522, Elangulam village,
Kanjirappally Taluk,
Kottayam.
(Adv. Nitheesh S.)
Vs.
Opposite parties : (1) Asian Paints Ltd.
Regional Office,
Rep. by Regional Manager,
Davi Building, 1st Floor,
Chakkaraparambu,
Labour Colony Road,
Thammanam P.O. – 682032.
(2) Santha Paints (Emporio)
Rep. by Managing Director,
Kattupara Building, NH 183,
. Near Fire station, Kanjirappally (W)
Kottayam – 686507.
O R D E R
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
The complaint is filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The complainant purchased paint products from the shop of the 2nd opposite party, manufactured by the 1st opposite party. On 23.04.19, 20.04.19, 01.05.19, 08.05.19 and on 09.05.2019 he purchased products for Rs1,06,405/-,Rs.1800/-,Rs.7800/-,Rs.2142/-,Rs.3180/- respectively to a total of Rs.1,21,307/-. These include Ultima protek, apex floor guar, emulsion, apex tile guard, woodtech touchwood etc. The advertisements of the opposite parties assured features like protection against algae and fungal infection and also offered 10 years warranty for the products. The said products were applied strictly following the stipulations and instruction of the opposite parties but within 6 months itself minor complaints were noticed. Complaints were registered and the complainant received receipt emails were received by the complainant. As the complaints improved day by day, the complainant approached the opposite parties for site inspection and also for directions regarding the removal of complaints and other remedies. In spite of the positive response, the opposite parties did not take any action upon the registered complaints. While so due to the covid 19 pandemic those were not properly adjudicated.
By the middle of 2021, the damages increased and fresh complaints were registered with the opposite parties mentioning the algae growth around the exterior walls and compound walls, certain portions of tile guard applied in roof tiles, fungal infection on touchwood, emulsion and damp proof peeling etc. Thereafter the representative of the 1st opposite party visited the building and submitted inspection report to the opposite parties. Though issues were raised regarding the product application, most of the damages and complaints were agreed by the representative and opined to compensate the complainant. But the opposite parties were not ready to provide reasonable compensation to the complainant and as the complainant is not willing to accept the nominal offers, the complaints were closed accordingly as per report dated 4.09.2021.
The complainant is a consumer and the act of the opposite parties of not compensating the complainant for his damages is a deficiency of service Now as the infected area is vast and as the repairing is not possible, repainting is needed which would cost Rs.1,21,307/-. The complainant has already paid Rs.1,21,307/- for purchasing the paint and 1,77,500/- for applying them all over the house.
The delay caused in filing the complaint can be condoned due to the pandemic situation and as per the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The complaint is filed for reimbursement of the amount or supply of same quantity of good quality products and for compensation.
Even upon receipt of notice, the opposite parties did not appear before the Commission or filed version and hence they were set exparte.
Towards the evidence part the complainant has produced Exhibits A1to A5.
A detailed perusal of the pleadings and evidence lead us to frame the points as
whether there is any deficiency in service made out by the complainant and if
so what are the reliefs he is entitled to ?
1. The complainant’s case is that the products which were purchased for painting his entire house from the opposite parties got damaged within a short span of time causing mental agony to the complainant and his family.
2. The complainant purchased paint products from the shop of the 2nd opposite party, manufactured by the 1st opposite party. On 23.04.19, 20.04.19, 01.05.19, 08.05.19 and on 09.05.2019 he purchased products for Rs1,06,405/-Rs.1800/-, Rs.7800/-, Rs.2142/-,Rs.3180/- respectively to a total of Rs.1,21,307/-.These include Ultima protek, apex floor guar, emulsion, apex tile guard, woodtech touchwood etc. The advertisements of the opposite parties assured features like protection against algae and fungal infection and also offered 10 years warranty for the products. Though the products were applied as per the instructions of the opposite parties within six months itself the painted surfaces started showing damages and later algae infestation.
3. In spite of the several complaints registered with the opposite parties, the opposite parties did not try to attend. Later in 2021 also several complaints were registered and upon that the opposite parties inspected the site. The complaint visit report given by the opposite parties is marked as Exhibit A2. In A2 report dated 4-09-2021 and 06-09- 2021 the observations are “paintable area of around 500 sqft. only 24 litre damp proof ultra used, which is only enough for 240 sqft. self priming coat is Missing. This has led to peeling”
4. From ExA2, it can be inferred that the paint applied by the complainant has got damaged. The opposite parties themselves admit that it had caught algae growth. It is further reported that the touch wood was not given warranty for its rough finish and scratches. Though the report says that there was high moisture content in the surface area, no primer was used, the damp proof ultra used was not enough etc. the opposite parties did not appear before us to defend the case with coherent
evidence that they had given specific instructions to the customer for the painting using their products. Instead they have stated in the report that though they offered compensation for complaint of algae growth around the exterior walls and compound walls, the complainant did not accept it.
5. From the pleadings and evidence set forth by the complainant, it is inferred that the complainant had to suffer a lot due to the use of the products purchased from the opposite parties. Exhibit A2 itself proves that the complaints were admitted by the opposite parties. So we don’t see the need of any expert evidence in addition.
6. In consumer protection Act, 2019 Section 2 (11)defines deficiency as “any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service and includes –
(i) any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer; and
(ii) deliberate withholding of relevant information by such person to the consumer”
7. In the light of above discussions and in the absence of contrary evidence, we find that the opposite party is liable for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Thus we allow the complaint as per the following order
1. The opposite parties are directed to give the same quantity of good quality products to the satisfaction of the complainant failing which reimburse Rs.1,21,307/- to the complainant with an interest @9%p.a from 20.08.21 till realization.
2. The opposite parties are directed to give Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and hardships.
The order shall be complied within 30 days failing which the compensation amount shall carry 9% interest from the date of order till realization.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 19th day of September, 2022
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Copy of invoices
A2 – Copy of complaint visit report issued by opposite party’
A3 – Lawyers notice dtd.23-05-21 issued to opposite parties
A4 –Postal receipts
Exhibits marked from the side of opposite party
Nil
By Order
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
