Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 422.
Instituted on : 24.07.2017.
Decided on : 06.03.2019.
Vinod Kumar son of Sh. Randhir Singh R/o Village-Gadhi Sampla, Tehsil-Sampla, District Rohtak, Age-about 45 years, Mb.92555-33299.
.......................Complainant.
Vs.
Krishna Marbles, Opp-Hardyal School Najafgarh Road, Bahadurgarh-124507 through its Proprietor Om Parkash.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Naveen Chaudhary & Sh.M.K.Vaid(legal aid counsel),
Advocates for the complainant.
Sh.Amit Kumar Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased Creak less Marble stones @ Rs.37/- per sq. fit from the opposite party in the month of February 2017. That the total cost of the above said white and creak less marble stones were Rs.100581/-. That at the time of purchase, the bill was not issued by the opposite party on the ground of misplace of bill book. But thereafter, complainant requested the opposite party many times to issue the bill and also registered a complaint before the C.M.window and only then the bill was given by the opposite party. That after completion of fitting and grinding/furnishing work, the complainant was stunned to see that the floor of his new house have so many black scars and various rough, black and yellow big spots etc. and the house of the complainant had grained from mostly all places. That complainant complained about the same to the opposite party and requested him to return the cost of marble stones but to no effect. That the act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.100581/- to the complainant alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses as explained in relief clause.
2. On notice opposite party appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that the contents regarding misplace of bill book and not issuing the bill are denied. That the complainant had not paid the tax amount of the above said marble to the respondent and the respondent had to issue a bill on dated 26.05.2017 as per pressure of the local police. That the complainant had purchased the marble after checking and fully satisfying with the same. That the marble stone was not having any guarantee and warranty. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, document Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and Ex.C9 to Ex.C35 in additional evidence and has closed his evidence on dated 28.01.2019. On the other hand ld. counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A & Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R12 and has closed his evidence on dated 16.08.2018.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspects of the case carefully.
5. As per the complainant, he has purchased the material/marble stones in the month of February 2017 and after fitting/furnishing of the marble in his house, so many black scars and various rough, black and yellow big spots etc. appeared on the floors due to sub standard quality of marbles. On the other hand, contention of the opposite party is that the complainant had purchased the marble after checking and fully satisfying with the same and the opposite party did not give any guarantee and warranty of the same. Hence the opposite party is not liable for the defect, if any, appeared in the alleged marble stone. Ld. counsel for the respondent has also placed reliance upon the law of Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi deciced on 15.02.2018 in Revision Petition No.2991 of 2017 titled as M/s Pearl Mineral Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Inder Paul Singh.
6. A bare perusal of the bill Ex.C1 shows that there is no guarantee/warranty mentioned on the bill. Moreover, no expert report has been placed on record by the complainant to prove that the alleged marble stone was of sub-standard quality. We have also taken strength from the findings given by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in M/s Pearl Mineral Pvt. Ltd.(Supra) whereby Hon’ble National Commission has held that: “No standard of marble has been prescribed by any Authority. Therefore in the absence of a guarantee/warranty, the seller cannot be held responsible if such a natural product develops crack within a period of about 2 years. The complainant purchased the marble, in its natural form after seeing the product. The petitioner having not manufactured it and having not given any guarantee/warranty with respect to any particular quality, they cannot be held liable if the marble developed cracks or pigmentation”. In view of the aforesaid law which is fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. As such, present complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
06.03.2019.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Ved Pal, Member.
…………………………………
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
