Date of filing :- 05/02/2013.

Date of Order :-04/11/2015.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No. 05 of 2013

Sashibhusan Panda, aged about 50(fifty) years, S/o Jaladhar Panda, R/o Ward No. 16, Bargarh, Near Indrabati Motors, Po/Ps/ Dist. Bargarh.

..... ..... ..... Complainant.

-V e r s u s -

1. Bajranglal Golpuria @ Agrawal, Proprietor of Golpuria Associates, At. Masjit Road, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist. Bargarh.

2. Bela Agrawal, Prop:- of Golpuria Associates, Masjit Road, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Dist. Bargarh.

..... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant:- Sri M.K.Pati, Advocate with other Advocates.

For the Opposite Parties :- Sri B. Behera, Advocate with other Advocates.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Mrs Anjali Behera ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... Member (w), I/C President.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Dt. 04/11/2015. -: J U D G E M E N T :-

Presented by Smt. A.Behera, Member(w), I/C President .

Facts of case :-

Complainant purchased some floor Tiles from the designated Opposite Parties in this Complaint paying the price. Afterwards some tiles broked when fitted and when Complainant requested to replace the tiles Opposite Parties did not paid any heed to the cause of the Complainant hence this case.

Complainant have filed the following documents and relies on them to substantiate their cause.

(1) Xerox copy of computer generated invoice of the purchase made.

Complainant prays for :-

1. Direction to the Opposite Parties to replace the defective tiles in issue and pay fitting expenses.

2. Compensation of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand)only for mental agony and another Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only for litigation expenses.

3. And any other suitable relief found just and proper by the forum.

Opposite Party been noticed after the Complaint was accepted for adjudication deemed fit as a Consumer Complaint. But here the Opposite Party named Bajranglal Golpuria appeared through Advocate B. Behera and appraised the Forum that he was served with the wrong summons and I am no way connected with the Complaint filed.

At this onset Complainant sought permission of the Forum to amend the pleadings appraising the reasons behind it. After hearing Complainant's submission considering the facts and circumstances amendment was allowed and the Opposite Party name corrected in the pleadings and fresh notice procedure initiated.

This new enlisted Opposite Party namely Bajrang Lal Golpuria @ Agrawal appeared and filed their version denying the association on this issue not being the Proprietor of Golpuria Associates and denied the allegation and prayed to dismiss the case against him on 26/06/2014.

On 10/11/2014 Complainant files petition about the real proprietor of Golpuria Associates. Being one Bela Agrawal and sought to add this Bela Agrawal as Opposite Party No.2(two) in the present case. The Opposite Party No.1(one) objected to this further Complaint files a piece of documents about the ownership of Golpuria Associates is with Bela Agrawal and the TIN number for tax purposes associated with this party proves the connection.

Under the fresh facts and circumstances addition of this party was allowed and Complaint proceeded. Opposite Party No.2(two) filed their version denying the charges against them on 09/09/2015 and prays for dismissal of the Complaint against her.

Heard the matter on Dt. 07/10/2015 in the presence of both the parties who submitted their respective causes in great detail.

The purchase of tiles, defect occruing, reported and action taken party by the Opposite Party No.2(two) admitted.

Contention of the Opposite Parties about limitation bar do not sustain.

Contention of the Opposite Parties about non joiner of necessary party do not stand in view of settled principles and laws.

Another contention of the Opposite Parties was that the problem was occurred due to carelessness of the Complainant and not because of the negligence of the Opposite Parties so for as this allegation is concerned it is found that Complainant have purchased three kinds of tiles to use from which only one type is problematic other type of tiles are OK. Further the same person who fitted the tiles can not be acquested of causing damage to one type of tiles and sparing other tiles as such this contentions also do not sustain in the eye of the Forum.

Another issue was also raised during the time of hearing about the relation of the Opposite Party No.2(two) with the manufacturing company and argued that for any manufacturing defects occurring in the product the company is liable to answer this. It will only be sufficient to mentioned that it is settled principle of law that for the actions of the Agent principal is also liable and there is no need to prosecute them separately to realize the losses occurred. Further it may be noted that when some goods were purchased the consumer at the Ist instance is confronts or associated with the dealer/shop keeper or owner of the shop and first contact point is this when any problem relating to any purchase occurs.

It is further found from the version of the Opposite Party No.2(two) that they were ready to replace the defective product that is tiles Sl. No.2(two) in the purchase invoice tagged with the case record issue by Golpuria Associates but the Complainant did not cooperated, do not sustain in the eye of the Forum.

Again as per the Complaint petition all the 50(fifty) packs of tiles purchased as cited in Sl. No.2(two) of the invoice got damaged and it mentioned of photography been taken but no photograph were filed before this Forum for perusal, neither Complainant was able to prove that all the tiles were got damaged in the process.

Under the above discussed facts and circumstances it is the ordain of the Forum that the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable for deficiency of service in the case.

Complaint allowed.

- O R D E R -

Opposite Parties are directed jointly and severally to pay Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand)only for the deficiency of services caused to the Complainant which includes the compensation, for mental agony and litigation cost, within one month of this order, failing which the awarded amount shall carry @ 10%(ten percent) interest per annum till the actual date of realization of amount.

Complaint allowed and disposed off accordingly.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

     (Smt.Anjali Behera)

M e m b e r(w), I/C President.

                                                                                                                    I agree,

                                                                                                 ( Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash )

                                                                                                                M e m b e r.