Kerala

Malappuram

CC/09/144

NAZHARUDHEEN - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANAGER,M/S GLAMOR SANITARY AND TILES - Opp.Party(s)

28 Jul 2009

ORDER


DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
B2 BLOCK, CIVIL STATION, PIN-676 505
consumer case(CC) No. CC/09/144

NAZHARUDHEEN
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

MANAGER,M/S GLAMOR SANITARY AND TILES
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,


 

1. Complainant alleges defect of tiles. It is his case that he purchased tiles on 01-12-2005 from opposite party for the purpose of laying in his house. He started residing in the house after the construction was over on 21-12-2000. He alleges that inJune, 2006 he noticed that all the tiles laid inside the house changed colour and became black. The matter was informed to opposite party who assured to replace the tiles. That later in June-July, 2008 he found the colour change of the tiles laid in the first floor.

2. As per the averments the tiles were purchased in 2005 and defect was first noticed in June, 2006. therefore the complaint which is filed on 08-6-2009 is barred by limitation. His statement that he noticed colour variation of the tiles of first floor in June, 2008 is apparently an attempt to circumvent the bar of limitation. It is also stated by him that the consideration for the tiles purchased by him in 2005 is not fully paid and that he is ready to pay the balance amount.

3. From the complaint we are able to hold that the complaint is per se barred by limitation and also lacks bonafideness. Hence complaint is dismissed as not maintainable.

     

    Dated this 28th day of July, 2009.


 


 

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT


 


 

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER


 


 


 


 


 


 




......................C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI