By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
1.Case of the complainant:-
Complainant is a sales girl in a firm. With the Government aid she is constructing a house for her and it is under construction. For plumbing and sanitary works of the above house, she approached opposite party No.1. From the opinion of the experts in this field she wanted to buy pipes and other fittings of Astral brand for plumbing and sanitary works of her house. For that purpose she approached opposite party No.1 and he assured that Astral brand products are available in his shop. He suggested the name of opposite party No.2 for fitting the pipes and other plumbing and sanitary fittings in complainant’s house. By believing the words of opposite party No.1, complainant had purchased the pipes and fittings of Astral brand from opposite party No.1 shop and decided to entrust the fitting works to opposite party No.2. On 24/08/2021 complainant had decided to buy the above products from opposite party No.1 shop and ordered the above products of Astral brand worth Rs.25,600/-. On that day itself she had given Rs. 25,000/- to opposite party No.1 and he mentioned about this into the bill given by him to complainant. Then opposite party No.1 called the complainant and told her that he will sent opposite party No.2 for the fitting works of the above sanitary products in complainant’s house.
2. On 25/08/2021 opposite party No.2 came to complainant’s house with the ordered Astral brand products as per the direction of opposite party No1. When scrutinising the above bill by complainant, she came to know that most of the products which had given by opposite party No.1 to complainant are low quality products, not Astral brand products. Then she contacted the opposite party No.1 through phone and in person and opposite party No.1 was ready to replace the products other than Astral brand. By believing the words of opposite party No.1, opposite party No.2 started his work. But the products which had sent by opposite party No.1 in the second time were also low quality products and not Astral brand products. Then complainant was forced to finish the plumbing works by using that substandard quality products. So in most of the area the pipes are not properly fitted. Due to the cheating from the side of opposite party No.1 and 2, complainant had suffered a lot mentally. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite parties which caused mental agony and financial loss to complainant. She is doing the construction work with the government aid to the poor people. She is a sales girl and mother of a child and she is also a widow. Moreover complainant had given Rs.15,000/- as wage to opposite party No.2 .The act of opposite parties are clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.
3. Prayer of the complainant is that she is entitled to get Rs. 40,000/- as the amount of the sanitary fittings and wages of opposite party No.2 and Rs. 75,000/- for the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the side of opposite parties.
4. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite parties and notice served on them and they appeared with their counsel and filed version.
5. In their version opposite party No.1 denied all the allegations stated by the complainant in her complaint except those which are admitted here under. Opposite party No.1 admitted that on 24/08/2021 complainant had ordered sanitary items from opposite party No.1 shop and paid Rs. 25,000/-. But they denied that they had entrusted opposite party No.2 for doing the plumbing works in complainant’s house. They again denied that they had given low quality sanitary and plumbing products to complainant. In their version they stated that complainant had wanted to change some of the ordered sanitary products and opposite party No.1 had already changed the products with new products which complainant wanted. As in their version they stated that complainant had approached them and bought sanitary and plumbing items which she wants and after reaching home she wanted to change some of the products she bought and as per her request opposite party No.1 changed the earlier products with new products. Moreover they contented that now also some amount is pending as balance to give to opposite party No1.They again stated that they never suggested and entrusted opposite party No.2 for fitting the sanitary and plumbing products in complainant’s house. Hence complaint may be dismissed.
6. In their version opposite party No.2 stated that he is an unknown person to this complainant. One Mr. Achuthan Koorithodi house Vazhakkad had taken some works of complainant’s house. Then he entrusted opposite party No.2 and his workers for doing that work. As per his direction opposite party No.2 did three days works with seven persons and they need half day more works with two persons in complainant’s house. The complainant had paid only Rs. 7,000/-including rent to this opposite party as wage. The complainant’s claim is that she had paid Rs. 15,000/- to opposite party No.2 as labour charge is false and baseless. In their version they stated that complainant herself supplied the materials to do the works in her house and he is innocent for the purchase of the materials. He is only a labourer and not supplied any kind of building materials to this complainant or any other person in his life time. More over this opposite party is entitled to get the balance amount of Rs. 1500/- from complainant. Hence this complaint may be dismissed.
7. In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, she filed an affidavit in lieu of Chief examination and the documents she produced were marked as Ext. A1 to A5. Ext.A1 series are the photocopies of the purchase order given by complainant to opposite party No.1 through whatsapp (6 pages), Ext.A2 is the original bill given by opposite party No.1 to complainant for receiving the amount of Rs. 25,000/- on 24/08/2021, Ext.A3 series are the photocopies of some sanitary and plumbing articles which complainant wants to change and send to opposite party No.1 through whatsapp, Ext.A4 is the estimate given by opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 dated 24/08/2021, Ext. A5 are the photographs of the plumbing works and pipes (6 photographs).
8. Thereafter opposite party No. 1 filed their counter affidavit but no documents produced. But opposite party No.2 not produced affidavit and documents.
9. Heard both sides. Perused complaint, version, affidavits and documents. The following points arise for consideration.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties.
- If so, Reliefs and cost.
10. Point No.1 :-
Complainant is a sales girl in a firm. With the Government aid she is constructing a house for her and it is under construction. For plumbing and sanitary works of the above house , she approached opposite party No.1 and he assured that Astral brand products are available in his shop and he suggested opposite party No.2 for fitting the pipes and the other plumbing and sanitary fittings in complainant’s house. By believing the words of opposite party No.1, complainant had purchased the pipes and fittings from opposite party No.1 shop and decided to entrust the fitting works to opposite party No.2. On 24/08/2021 complainant had decided to buy the above products from opposite party No.1 shop and ordered the above products of Astral brand worth Rs. 25,600/-. On that day itself she had paid Rs. 25000/- to opposite party No.1.
11. When scrutinising the above bill, complainant came to know that most of the products which had given by opposite party No.1 to complainant are low quality products, not Astral brand products. Then she contacted the opposite party No.1 and he was ready to replace the products other than Astral brand. By believing the words of opposite party No1, opposite party No.2 started his work. But the products which had sent by opposite party No.1 in the second time were also low quality products and not Astral brand products. Then complainant was forced to finish the plumbing works by using that substandard quality products. Due to the deficiency of service from the side of opposite parties which caused mental agony and financial loss to complainant. Moreover opposite party No.2 had received about Rs.15,000/- as wage. The acts of opposite parties are clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
12. Opposite party No.1 admitted that on 24/08/2021 complainant had ordered sanitary items from opposite party No.1 shop and paid Rs.25,000/-.But they denied that they had entrusted opposite party No.2 for doing the plumbing works in complainant’s house. They again denied that they had supplied low quality sanitary and plumbing products to complainant. In their version they stated that complainant had wanted to change some of the sanitary products. Some of the products purchased by the complainant were already replaced by opposite party No.1.In their version they stated that complainant had approached them and bought sanitary and plumbing items which she wants and after reaching home she wanted to change some of the products she bought and as per her request opposite party No.1 changed the earlier products with new products. Moreover they contented that now also some amount is pending to pay by complainant to opposite party No1.
13. In their version opposite party No.2 stated that he is an unknown person to this complainant. One Mr. Achuthan Koorithodi house Vazhakkad had taken some works of complainant’s house. Then he entrusted opposite party No.2 and his workers for doing that work. As per his direction opposite party No.2 did three days works with seven persons and they need half day more works with two persons in complainant’s house. The complainant had paid only Rs.7000/-including rent to this opposite party as wage. The complainant’s claim is that she had paid Rs.15000/- to opposite party No.2 as labour charge is false and baseless. In their version they stated that complainant herself supplied the materials to do the works in her house and he is innocent for the purchase of the materials. He is only a labourer and not supplied any kind of building materials to this complainant or any other person in his life time. More over this opposite party is entitled to get the balance amount of Rs. 1500/- from complainant.
14. From the above facts it is seen that complainant had purchased plumbing and sanitary items from opposite party No.1 shop worth Rs.25,600/- and she paid Rs.25,000/- on that day itself. Opposite party No.1 also admitted the same. As per Ext A1 documents page No.2, it is seen that complainant wanted Astral pipes and fittings. In Ext. A2 the quotation given by opposite party No.1 to complainant, it is seen that so many items are from Astral brand. But some products marked by complainant are not Astral brand products. In Ext.A3 it is seen that on 25/08/2021 complainant sent some photographs of the pipes and fittings to opposite party No.1. From the documents it is unknown to the commission about the conversation between opposite party No.1 and complainant. But from the facts of the case we are on the opinion that she had sent the messages and photos to opposite party No1 for changing the items other than Astral brand items.
15. From the version and affidavit filed by opposite party No.1 it is seen that there is some misunderstanding and confusion between complainant and opposite party No.1 regarding the items given by opposite party No.1 to complainant. In Para 3 of the affidavit of opposite party No.1, he admitted that O¢k o¡-b-c-¹-w d-j¡-Y¢-´¡-j¢ h¡-×¢ cv-J-X-¨h-¼® B-l-m¬-¨¸-¶¢-¶¤-¾-Y¤« d-j¡-Y¢-´¡-j¢-´® C-né-¨¸-¶ o¡-bc-¹w h¡-×¢ cv-J¢-i¢-¶¤-¾Y¤« d-j¡-Y¢-´¡-j¢-i¤¨T F¿¡ d-j¡-Y¢i¤« h¡-c¬-h¡-i¤«- j-h¬-h¡i¤« d-j¢-p-j¢-µ¢-¶¤-¾-Y¤-h¡X®.” From the above facts we are on the opinion that complainant had called opposite party No.1 and sent messages to opposite party No1 regarding the quality of items sent by him to complainant. It is very clear that on the very next day complainant contacted the opposite party No.1 for informing him that some items she bought were substandard quality as per her view. From the complaint itself she said that she wanted Astral brand sanitary and pipe fittings and from the affidavit and version of opposite party No.1 they admitted that complainant had called them for changing some of the articles given to her and they have settled the matter amicably. So it is very clear that there was some confusion between complainant and opposite party No.1. From the documents produced by the complainant she had some conversation with opposite party No.1 regarding the brand of the item, the quality of the item and for changing the item which are not Astral brand. In Ext.A2 she had marked some of the columns which are not Astral brand products and from Ext.A2 itself it is seen that she had paid Rs.25000/- to opposite party No.1 on that day itself. Opposite party No.1 also admitted the same. 16. As per Ext.A5 photographs (5 Nos.) it is not clear that what are the damage caused to these pipes. Moreover it is not clear that these are Astral products or not.
But opposite party No.1 and 2 did not raise any objection regarding the photographs and documents produced by complainant. So it is clear that opposite party No.1 had delivered some products (marked by complainant in Ext.A2) to complainant which are not Astral brand products .As per complainant’s case products other than Astral brand are low quality. But opposite party No.1 did not take any steps to prove that he had given the high quality products to complainant or he had given all the products of Astral brand to complainant. They have no murmuring regarding that aspect in their version and affidavit.
17. But from the documents and from the complaint it is clear that opposite party No.2 had done the work of complainant in her house. But there is no document to prove the relationship between opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 other than the coolie works done by him in complainant’s house. Moreover there is no documents to prove that complainant had given Rs.15,000/- as labour charge to opposite party No.2 .But he admits that she had paid only Rs.7,000/- and there is a balance of Rs.1500/- is pending. There is no document to prove that opposite party No.1 had sent opposite party No.2 into complainant‘s house for doing the works. There is no document to prove that opposite party No.1 and 2 had any relationship between them or opposite party No.1 had sent opposite party No.2 to complainant’s house. Not only that there is no case against opposite party No.2 in the complaint of complainant. We are unable to know that opposite party No.2 had appointed by opposite party No.1 or not. As per the version of opposite party No.2, he is an unknown person to this complainant is more or less true. He admitted that he had done the plumbing and sanitary works in complainant’s house. But complainant is failed to prove that opposite party No.2 had appointed by opposite party No.1 and she had given Rs.15000/- to opposite party No.2.
18. From the facts and documents, we are on the opinion that opposite party No.1 had given plumbing and sanitary fittings other than Astral products to complainant which are marked by her in her documents. There is a clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party No.1. The contention of complainant is that she is a poor lady and a widow and she is doing her construction work with government aid. But no document produced to prove that the construction work is doing with the government aid. But it is easy to produce the documents from Panchayath before the Commission. But there is no need to disbelieve the complainant. Moreover she had given the amount of Rs.25000/- to opposite party No.1 on that day itself. So it is the duty of opposite party No.1 to give the products she wanted. One of the contentions of opposite party No.1 is that he
had replaced some products which complainant wants. But there is no documents to prove this contention. Opposite party No.1 did not produce documents to prove his case. He can easily produce the first bill and the second bill of the changed products before the Commission. But there are no documents from his side. Hence we are unable to understand that opposite party No.1 had changed the products or not. Moreover opposite party No.1 did not raise any objection regarding the documents produced by complainant. From the above facts it is clear that there is clear deficiency of service and unfair trade practice from the side of opposite party No.1. Hence we allow this complaint holding that opposite party No.1 is deficient in service.
19. We allow this complaint as follows:-
- The opposite party No.1 is directed to refund Rs. 6800/-(Rupees Six thousand and eight hundred only) the cost of the products other than Astral to the complainant.
- The opposite party No.1 is directed to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) to the complainant on account of deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 and thereby caused mental agony, physical hardships and sufferings to the complainant.
- The opposite party No.1 is also directed to pay Rs. 5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) 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 No.1 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 25th day of August , 2022.
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.A1to A5
Ext.A1 : Series are the photocopies of the purchase order given by complainant to
opposite party No.1 through whatsapp (6 pages).
Ext.A2 : Original bill given by opposite party No.1 to complainant for receiving the
amount of Rs. 25,000/- on 24/08/2021.
Ext.A3 : Series are the photocopies of some sanitary and plumbing articles which
complainant wants to change and send to opposite party No.1 through
whatsapp.
Ext.A4 : Estimate given by opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 dated
24/08/2021.
Ext. A5 : Photographs of the plumbing works and pipes (6 photographs).
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
