DATE OF FILING : 7.09.2009
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI Dated this the 28th day of June, 2010
Present: SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER
C.C No.172/2009 Between Complainant : Sr. Maris Sister Superior, St. Mary's Convent, Painavu P.O., Painavu, Idukki District. (By Adv: K.J. Thomas) And Opposite Parties : 1. The Proprietor, High Range Ceramics, Idukki Road, Thodupuzha, Idukki District. 2. Western Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. 27/4558, Kavanal Building, Alappattu Cross Road, Ravipuram, Kochi - 682015, Ernakulam District. (Both by Advs: Saju Paul, K.S. Binu & Fenil Jose)
O R D E R
SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHANAN (PRESIDENT)
The complainant is the sister superior of St. Mary's Convent, Painavu. The said congregation is having an L.P. School and other educational institutions. They have got recognition from the government to start a special school for the study of mentally retarded students. The construction of the building completed in December, 2008 and it was inaugurated on 13th December, 2008 in the name and style, “Amal Jyothi”. The said school is having a 3 storied building. The complainant approached the 1st opposite party in order to purchase tiles for the flooring of the said building. The 1st opposite party supplied 5564 square feet of tiles to the complainant which was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. The complainant visited the shop of the 1st opposite party and order for the same was given after inspecting the tiles. The 1st opposite party received an amount of Rs.1,76,668/- for the purchase of the same. The 1st opposite party convinced that vertified tiles supplied are of good quality and on believing the words of the 1st opposite party the complainant ordered the same. The complainant spent about Rs.1 lakh for the purchase of cement, sand etc. for the flooring of the tiles. The said tiles were floored in the conference hall, dining hall, kitchen and toilet of the school building. The tiles ordered for flooring in the conference hall and dining hall were in ivory colour with a measurement of 2 x 2 square feet. But the opposite party supplied only a small quantity of the same, which ordered by the complainant and the balance tiles were low quality which resembles the colour and measurement of the same. And they were supplied at the building of the complainant by the opposite party. After few days of the flooring, there appeared black spots in the tiles laid in the kitchen and dining hall, gradually it developed and spread to more tiles. The matter was informed to the opposite party, an authorised person from the opposite party inspected the tiles, and took photographs of the same. They assured that necessary action will be taken for curing the same. But nothing was done as per their assurance. This caused a heavy loss to the complainant and it is only because the opposite party supplied low quality tiles to the complainant even though they assured to give quality tiles at the time of ordering the same. So the petition is filed for getting back the amount paid which is Rs.1,76,668/- with 18% interest and Rs.1,50,000/- for flooring the new tiles.
2. In the written version of the opposite party, it is admitted that the 1st opposite party supplied tiles to the complainant as per the order given in June 2007, which is manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. The complainant ordered ivory colour, orchid design tiles in order to lay in the kitchen and dining hall. As per the order 388 vertified tiles which comes about 1552 square feet with a rate of Rs.44/square feet was supplied to the complainant with a cost of Rs.68,288/-. The opposite party supplied ivory colour caraone design tiles of 116 in numbers which comes about Rs.464 square feet area for an amount of Rs.44/square feet to the complainant with an amount of Rs.20,416/-. The bathroom wall tiles comes to a square feet of 1340 which cost Rs.22,780/- and the bathroom flooring tiles comes to an area of square feet of 1100 for an amount of Rs.22,000/- were supplied to the complainant. So the total amount of the tiles supplied to the complainant is Rs.1,33,486/-, an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was received from the complainant and the bill for the same also issued to the complainant. Considering the complainant's institution is a charitable one, the tiles were supplied in a low price than in the market value with discount by the 1st opposite party. On April 2009, the complainant approached the 1st opposite party and requested for a voucher with discount in order to show the account and so a voucher was given by the opposite party. The complainant never purchased tiles as per the voucher of Rs.1,76,668/-. The tiles purchased by the complainant were manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. The complainant, other sisters and workers visited the shop of the 1st opposite party and after inspecting all the tiles, the order was given to the opposite party. The 1st opposite party supplied the same at Pinavu, which are having good quality, ordered by the complainant. It is also admitted by the opposite party that the tiles were floored in the conference hall, dining hall, kitchen and toilet in the building of the complainant. It is false that the complainant booked ivory colour tiles with measurement of 2 x 2 square feet for laying in the conference hall and dining hall. The opposite party supplied the same tiles which were ordered by the complainant. The opposite party never assured anything to the complainant or never visited the tiles after when black spots appeared. Vertified tiles of the same batch number with orchid design were supplied to several persons through different shops by the 2nd opposite party. But no complaint has been received from any of them. The 1st opposite party also supplied the same types to several persons, but no complaint has been raised from any of them. It is admitted that there are black spots appeared in 14 number of tiles laid in the dining hall and kitchen of the complainant. But it may be because of the mixing of any material used for laying tiles or due to defect caused to the labourers who laid the same. It can be also because of any fluid spread over the tiles after the flooring and not because of any deficiency from the opposite party or the quality difference of the tiles.
3. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to? 4. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PWs1 & 2 and Exts.P1 & P2 and Ext.C1 commission report are marked on the side of the complainant and oral testimony of DWs1 & 2 on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The POINT :- The petition is filed for getting compensation due to defect in the tiles supplied by the opposite party for flooring the school building of the complainant. The complainant is examined as PW1. The complainant is the mother superior of the St. Mary's Convent and Ext.P2 is the copy of the appointment letter. PW1 purchased 5564 square feet of vertified tiles from 1st opposite party shop as per the order given by them and paid an amount of Rs.1,76,668/- for the same. Ext.P1 is the copy of the voucher for the same. PW1 and other sisters approached the 1st opposite party to purchase the same. The tiles ordered by PW1 was ivory colour with measurement 2 x 2 square feet for flooring in the conference hall and dining hall. As per assurance given by the 1st opposite party about the quality and quantity of the tiles, they purchased the same. But the opposite party supplied low quality tiles which resembles colour and measurement of tiles which were ordered by the complainant. After few days of the flooring, black spots were appeared in the tiles, in dining hall, gradually increased and spread in the dining hall and kitchen. There are no such defect in 90 number of tiles which were floored in the conference hall. The matter was informed to the opposite party and they came over there, took photographs and assured to cure the same, but nothing was done. On cross examination of learned counsel for the opposite party, PW1 deposed that they have purchased 2 types of tiles, one type of tiles for rooms and other type were for bathroom. No bill was issued to the complainant, but Ext.P1 voucher was given and delivery note was also given. The amount was paid at Thodupuzha. The stamp shown in Ext.P1 was affixed from the shop itself. It is understood that the tiles ordered by them were supplied by the opposite party. The black spots were appeared after few months of the flooring. The black spots were appeared before the inauguration of the building. There are more than 50 children and 8 sisters residing in that convent and are using the same kitchen and dining hall for taking food. PW2 is the commissioner who inspected the disputed building and Ext.C1 is the commission report. PW2 deposed that same type of tiles were floored in dining hall and kitchen and black spots were appeared on there. Flooring of tiles in dining hall and kitchen looks not good. 1st opposite party is examined as DW1. DW1 deposed that the tiles were purchased from his shop by the complainant and a voucher was given by DW1. Ext.P1 is not the voucher supplied by DW1. DW1 never signed in Ext.P1 voucher. Bill was issued by DW1. Black spots were noticed by him. The tiles supplied were in good quality and the same are ordered by the complainant. The colour of the tiles will change if any material with acidity spreads on the tiles. The tiles supplied by DW1 were manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. In ordinary tiles there will not occur any spots when acid spread on them, but in vertified tiles, the colour will change and spots will appear if the acid spread on it. Same type of tiles were supplied for the flooring in dining hall and conference hall. But no change caused in the tiles floored in conference hall. 2nd opposite party is examined as DW2. DW2 deposed that the tiles used by the complainant is manufactured by him and supplied through the 1st opposite party. 1st opposite party is the dealer of DW2. There is no dispute on payment. Ivory based colour tiles were supplied to the complainant. The disputed tiles are also ivory colour. There is no complaint received from 74 dealers, to whom the same batch tiles were distributed. No defect caused to them. The colour change can be possible due to mishandling, if any substance falls on the tiles. It may happen if anything mixed with cement used for laying tiles. It is admitted by the opposite party that black spots were appeared on the tiles which laid in the kitchen and dining hall of the complainant's school. As per the complainant, the opposite party supplied low quality tiles for flooring in the kitchen and dining hall even though the complainant ordered for a good quality tiles. The opposite party supplied some good quality tiles and the balance were low quality resembling the colour and size of the good quality. As per the complainant, they have paid Rs.1,76,668/- for the entire tiles as per Ext.P1 voucher. The black spots were appeared after 2 months of the flooring of the tiles. As per the Ext.C1 commission report, the black spots were appeared in 70 number of tiles in dining hall and kitchen, out of 420 tiles laid in dining hall and kitchen. Comparing the tiles laid in conference hall, the tiles laid in kitchen and dining hall are having increase in width between the tiles. The black spots are scattered in several tiles, so it needed to remove all the tiles for fresh flooring. According to the opposite party, the tiles supplied to the complainant are good quality and which are the same ordered by the complainant after convincing the quality at their shop. PW1 also admitted that they understood that the tiles ordered were supplied to them. As per DW1, black spots can be happened if any material of having acidity falls or spread on the tiles. The colour change can be happened in vertified tiles. As per opposite party, Ext.P1 voucher was not issued by them. Signature is not of DW1. They have issued a bill of Rs.1,30,000/-. DW2 admitted that he supplied tiles to the 1st opposite party, which the complainant used. Tiles with same batch number were supplied to 74 dealers and there is no complaint received from any of the customers. So there is no chance for any manufacturing defect in the tiles. The colour change can be happened by mis-handling or any substance falls on it, if some material mixed with the cement used for laying, and not because of the quality.
As per cross examination of the learned counsel for the opposite party, PW1 admitted that the tiles supplied by the 1st opposite party are of the same, which ordered by the complainant. Black spots were appeared only in the tiles which are laid in dining hall and kitchen. As per PW1, 2 types of tiles were purchased, one for bathroom and the other type were for flooring in the rooms. The black spots were appeared after 2 months, before the inauguration, but PW1 paid the entire bill even that the black spots were appeared in the tiles. As per PW1, Ext.P1 is the voucher issued by DW1 from his shop as per the request of PW1, for the bill. On perusing Ext.P1, there is no date or number is written, the name of the customer is not written and it is written, “I, A.K. Sreekumar, High Range Ceramics, have received from Sister Superior, St. Mary's convent, Painavu, the sum of Rs.... as detailed below” and the particulars is written as 5564' tiles and amount as Rs.1,76,668/- and in the bottom portion, it is written Sister Superior, Treasurer. A court fee stamp of Rs.5/- is affixed and a signature is on there. As per PW1, 2 types of tiles were purchased. The square feet rate of the tiles are not written in the voucher. In that Ext.P1, it is written, “A.K. Sreekumar, High Range Ceramics”, and the amount with measurement are with ink and the other matters are printed in press. So 5 rupees court fee stamp is affixed and signed on the same which is affixed in the row in which it is printed Sister Superior, Treasurer. As per DW1, he never signed in that Ext.P1 voucher and it was not supplied by DW1. In that voucher it is printed that “I, ….. have received from Sister Superior, St. Mary's Convent Painavu”, and in the bottom, “Sister Superior Treasurer” and it is supplied by the opposite party which is not at all believable. Why the 1st opposite party is keeping a printed voucher in the name of Sister Superior, St.Mary's Convent and a row is separately printed for Sister Superior Treasurer for signing, in that place 5 rupees court fee stamp is affixed and a signature is affixed on that court fee stamp. So we think that it may be a voucher from the St. Mary's Convent and got signed from the 1st opposite party. It cannot be believable that it is supplied by the 1st opposite party as per the request of the complainant. Why (contd...5)
- 5 -
the 1st opposite party is keeping a voucher of the St. Mary's Convent is not also explained by the complainant. The signature and stamp is affixed in the portion of Sister Superior Treasurer. So Ext.P1 is not at all believable but these matters are not challenged by the opposite party anywhere. The rate of tile is not mentioned in the voucher, only an amount is written. So we suspect the genuineness of Ext.P1. What prevented the complainant to get a detailed invoice if they have paid the entire bill to the 1st opposite party. The complainant is a mother superior of a reputed charitable trust and if the opposite party denies to supply the bill, the complainant can approach police or salestax department or such other authorities for the same. That was not done by the complainant. They have satisfied with the Ext.P1 voucher. And there is no dispute raised by the complainant in this petition about non-supply of bill. The complainant also admitted that they have paid the entire amount to the opposite party without any dispute even after the black spots were appeared on the tiles. So it means that the complainant is hiding something and the version of the complainant is not at all believable. The complainant has claimed an amount of Rs.1,76,668/- for the cost of tiles and also an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- for cost of replacing the tiles with compensation. As per the commission report, black spots were appeared only on 70 numbers of tiles in the dining hall and kitchen. The cost of the tile is Rs.44/square feet as per the opposite party, the complainant also admitted that there is only 1550 square feet of tiles laid in dining hall and kitchen. No defect is caused to any other tiles purchased by the complainant. As per DW1 and DW2, same types of tiles were supplied to the complainant for flooring in conference hall, in the dining hall and in kitchen. It is also admitted by the complainant that 2 types of tiles were purchased by the complainant, one type for flooring in rooms and the other type for bath room. But there is no defect caused to the tiles floored in any other room. As per the opposite parties, the colour change can be happen if some material having acidity falls or spreads on vertified tiles. That will not happen in the ordinary tiles, but in vertified tiles it will happen. If any material mixed with the cement at the time of flooring, that will also cause for colour change. There are 50 students and 8 sisters, using the dining room and kitchen. It is a special school for mentally retarded students. There is no report or any complaint from 74 stockists of the 2nd opposite party in which the same batch number tiles were supplied. So the deposition of PW1 and Ext.P1 makes us a conclusion that the black spots appeared on certain number of tiles in the dining hall and kitchen of the complainant's school may be caused because, some material having acidity have spread on the floor and not because of any defect in quality of the tiles.
Hence the petition dismissed. No cost is ordered against the complainant.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 28th day of June, 2010.
Sd/- SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)
Sd/- SMT. SHEELA JACOB (MEMBER)
Sd/- SMT. BINDU SOMAN (MEMBER)
APPENDIX
Depositions : On the side of the Complainant : PW1 - Sr. Maris PW2 - Sijimon K. Augustine On the side of the Opposite parties : DW1 - Sreekumar A.K. DW2 - C.N. Jayasankar Exhibits : On the side of the Complainant : Ext.P1 - Copy of the voucher in which particulars is written as 5564' Tiles and amount Rs. 1,76,668/-. Ext.P2 - Copy of the appointment letter from Mother Provincial, appointing the complainant as the Superior of the Convent, dated 20.5.2007. Ext.C1 - Commission Report dated 30th November, 2009. On the side of the Opposite parties : Nil.
|
