By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER

The complaint  in short is as follows:-

1.    On 10/08/2023 complainant had purchased some tiles worth Rs.67,720/- from opposite party for his newly constructing house. After the construction completed, some tiles left in the site and complainant approached opposite party for return back the  unused  tiles to them,  but  they  are  reluctant  to  receive  that tiles  stating  the reason that the stock of that particular tiles already over.

2.   Complainant stated that he is an ordinary man and he is not aware about the bill and other procedures. But after verifying the bill it is seen that opposite party had provided a tax invoice for Rs.36,538/- to him. Complainant also submitted that all the tiles mentioned in the estimate were purchased by him and opposite party only provided the tax invoice for a reducible amount to him for tax reduction. Moreover opposite party never told to him directly or through any document that they will never taken back the balance product after work completed. Complainant also stated that, at the time of unloading the tiles at complainant's house by the driver of   opposite party, complainant entrusted the full amount to that driver. Complainant again stated that it was wrong to say that these tiles were ordered by opposite party only for complainant. There is clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party and it caused mental agony and hardship and financial sufferings to complainant.  Hence this complaint.

3.    The prayer of the complainant is that, issue a direction from this Commission to opposite party for taking back the remaining tiles from complainant, Rs.50,000/- as    compensation on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant and cost of the proceedings. 

4.   On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and notice served on them  on 30/11/2023  and they appeared before the Commission through their counsel and filed version.

5.      In their version, they denied all the allegations levelled by complainant against them except those which are admitted there under. They stated that they conducting the above shop for their livelihood and they are selling the tiles in a very low price. Complainant is residing nearly 40 km away from the shop of opposite party. They admitted that complainant came to their shop on 10/08/2023 and he had ordered some products and a quotation/ estimate for Rs.67,720/- had given to him and complainant had given Rs.1000/- as advance to opposite party. At the time of selling the tiles opposite party clearly told to complainant that he had sold all the products in a very low price, hence he is not ready to taken back the products. After giving the advance of Rs.1000/-, complainant had not taken the selected tiles mentioned in the estimate. On the next day complainant came to their shop and demanded some other tiles having low price and selected some low-priced items. The selected products in the second time were very low-priced items nearly 50% low from the estimate. Hence complainant is well aware that the tiles purchased by him is very low priced and which is not available in the market. Opposite party also stated that they convinced the complainant that they will not taken back the product. So  there is no deficiency in service from the side of opposite party  . Hence complaint may be dismissed.

6.      In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit in lieu of Chief examination and the documents he produced were marked as Ext. A1 and A2. Ext.A1 is the copy of estimate dated 10/08/2023. Ext.A2 is the copy tax invoice given by opposite party to complainant dated 11/08/2023. Thereafter opposite party also filed their affidavit and document they filed is marked as Ext.B1. Ext.B1 is the copy of tax invoice given by opposite party to complainant.

7.    Heard complainant and opposite party. Perused affidavit and documents.  The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party?
2. If so, reliefs and cost?

Point No.1 and 2:-

8.     Case of the complainant is that opposite party was reluctant to taken back the balance tiles after the construction of his house. But opposite party stated that there is no such practice to take back the tiles after selling the same. Ext.A2 and B1 are the same document which is given by opposite party to complainant on 11/08/2023. Ext. A1 is an estimate alleged to be given by opposite party to complainant.

9.        While going through the affidavits and documents of both parties it is seen that there is no complaint regarding the quality of the tiles or such other things. The complaint is only to taken back the remaining tiles came after the construction completed. While verifying the documents it is seen that both parties are admitted the purchase of tiles by complainant from the shop of opposite party and the documents are also same. The main contention of opposite party is that they never told to complainant that they will taken back the balance tiles after the constructionover. But in Ext.A2 and  Ext. B1 nowhere stated that they will not taken back the tiles after sale.

10.    Complainant stated that Ext.A1 is a quotation/estimate given by opposite party to him. But the name of opposite party is not mentioned there. But opposite party never questioned the veracity of Ext.A1 document and he has no contention that the above Ext.A1 was not given by him to complainant. While going through the version, it is seen that opposite party stated that he will not taken back the tiles because the already sold tiles were not available in the market. But in the affidavit he stated that he will not taken back the tiles already sold because he wants to stop his business and also due to the non-availability of the same tiles in the market.  In that affidavit itself, he stated that due to NH road widening he had lost the road access and he also lost the sale of products and hence he is selling the products in a very reduced price. Moreover, there is huge difference in the rate of tiles on 10/08/2023 and 11/8/2023.  Opposite party themselves said that they had given the tiles in a reduced price nearly 50%. But there is no document to prove that opposite party had sold the tiles in a reduced price nearly 50%. He did not produce any document to show the actual price of the product sold by him to complainant. If he submitted that documents before the Commission, then only we can compare the price of the product. In the estimate they clearly stated that they will not taken back the already sold products. But they have no argument that they had clearly mentioned in the estimate that they will not taken back the sold products. As per Ext.A2 and B1, complainant purchased the tiles in a low price on the very next day and in that document nothing mentioned about  the return of balance tiles.  It is doubtful.

11.   Opposite party also stated that on 10/08/2023 complainant came to their shop and they had given a quotation for Rs.67,720/-and complainant had given an advance of Rs.1000/- to them.  But the name of tiles mentioned in Ext.A1 and A2 are entirely different. No details about the tiles were mentioned in Ext.A2 and B1.  So Commission is not aware that whether the complainant had ordered the same tiles on 10/08/2023 and 11/08/2023 or not. There is so many confusion in both the documents and there is nothing mentioned about the return of products after use in Ext. B1 and A2. Moreover, the contentions of opposite party in their version and affidavit are somewhat different and confusing. Complainant clearly stated in his complaint that the balance tiles were nearly 139.5 Sqft. As per Ext A1, the rate for 1 Sqft of tile is Rs.45/-, hence the rate of 139.5 Sqft of tile is nearly is Rs.6277/-. In the version opposite party stated that when complainant paid the bill amount to them, then they provided the tax invoice/bill to complainant. That means complainant had paid the entire amount to opposite party. So it is easy for opposite party to submit the payment details made by complainant to them. It is the duty of opposite party to submit that details before the Commission to prove their case that complainant only paid the amount mentioned in Ext.B1. But they did not produce that document. They suppressed that details from the Commission. Complainant is entitled to get that amount compensation and cost of the proceedings. Hence the Commission finds that there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint. Hence we allow this complaint holding that opposite party is deficient in service.

12.   We allow this complaint as follows:-

1. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs.6,277/- (Rupees Six  thousand  two hundred and seventy seven only) the cost of the balance tiles  to the complainant and complainant is directed to return the remaining  tiles  to opposite party  after  payment made by them. 
2. The opposite party is also directed to pay compensation of Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant.
3. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) to the complainant as cost of the proceedings.

      If the above said amount is not paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the opposite party is liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the said amount from the date of receipt of the copy of this order till realisation.

Dated this 22^nd day of November, 2024.

MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT

PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER

MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant                  : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant               : Ext.A1 & A2

Ext.A1 : Copy of estimate dated 10/08/2023.

Ext.A2 : Copy tax invoice given by  opposite party to complainant . 

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party              : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite party            : Ext. B1

Ext. B1 : Copy of tax invoice  given by  opposite party  to complainant.

MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT

PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER

MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER