Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/130/2017

Dr.P.Umamaheshwarappa S/o late Puttanaik - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Properitor,Rajkumara Granites - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.P.S.Sathyanarayanarao

21 Dec 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:07/12/2017

DISPOSED      ON012/12/2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

C.C.NO:130/2017

 

DATED: 21st DECEMBER 2018

PRESENT :-     SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH :   PRESIDENT                                     B.A., LL.B.,

                        SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,                LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Dr. P. Umamaheshwarappa, S/o Late Puttanaik, Age: 43 Years, Sri SevalalSadana, Behind Market Yard, Opp: Urdu School, Vedavathi Nagar, Hiriyur, Chitradurga District.   (Rep by Sri.P. Sathyanarayana Rao, Murthy, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTY	The Proprietor, Rajakumar Granites, Mysore Road, Hiriyur town, Chitradurga.   (Rep by Sri.L. Madhusudhan, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OP to refund Rs.4,21,011/-, Rs.50,000/- towards costs and such other reliefs. 

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, the complainant has purchased tiles worth Rs.1,23,011/- from OP by paying cash on different dates.  The same has been fixed by spending Rs.90,000/- towards labour charges, Rs.80,000/- towards cement, sand, jelly etc., and Rs.20,000/-towards transportation and handling charges and Rs.8,000/- towards labour residence charges, in all the complainant has incurred Rs.4,21,011/- towards fixing the tiles to his top floor house.  It is submitted that, after fixing the tiles, i.e., after 3-4 months, the affixed tiles were becoming bending, cracking and turning into discoloring and now it looks very ugly and indecent manner.  It is very clear that, the OP has supplied very low quality and substandard tiles by taking abnormal amount from the complainant, which shows the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.  For the illegal acts of the OP, the complainant has incurred heavy financial loss, loss of time and loss of happiness and suffering from mental agony for having purchased the low quality tiles.  It is further submitted that, to avoid tax, the OP has not given any original bill/receipts containing TIN or VAT numbers.  The OP has given bills only on white paper.  The complainant approached the OP several times and requested to replace the tiles which was supplied by it, at the beginning the OP has agreed to replace the tiles, but later, refused to do so.  Thereafter, the complainant got issued legal notice to OP on 31.08.2017 through his Advocate, the same has been served on 05.09.2017.  But, in the reply, the OP has informed that, the above dispute is in Hon’ble State Commission and they have got stay in Appeal No.1427/2017, the said dispute is different from that of previous dispute.  The cause of action for this complaint arose on 05.09.2017 when the legal notice served on the OP which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum.  Therefore, the complainant respectfully prayed before this Forum to allow his complaint. 

3.      On service of notice, OP appeared through Sri. L. Madhusudhan, Advocate and filed version.  It is denied that, the complainant has purchased tiles worth Rs.1,23,011/- from OP by paying cash on different dates and also it is false to state that, the complainant has spent Rs.90,000/- towards labour charges, Rs.80,000/- for cement, sand, jelly etc., and Rs.20,000/- towards transportation and handling charges and Rs.8,000/- towards labour residence charges, in all a sum of Rs.4,21,011/- towards fixing of the tiles to his top floor house and the same is put to strict proof of the same.  After fixing the tiles and after 3-4 months, the tiles started bending and cracks are developed and turned discoloring and which looks ugly, the same is put to strict proof of the same.  It is false to state that, the OP has supplied low quality and substandard tiles and there is no deficiency of service and the complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  It is put to strict proof of the same that, the OP has agreed to replace the tiles supplied first and later refused to replace the same.  It is further submitted that, regarding issuance of notice and pending of appeal before Hon’ble State Commission is not known to this OP.  The complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party such as manufacturer of the tiles for the reason this OP is the dealer of tiles of various companies.  The alleged cause of action is false and further the complainant is not a consumer and there is no deficiency of service and the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      Complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-8 were got marked. On behalf of OPs, one Sri. JayanthiLal. D, the Proprietor of OP has examined as DW-1 by filing the affidavit evidence and nodocuments have been got marked.  

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OP has committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

          Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative.

          Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      It is not in dispute that, complainant has purchased the tiles from OP by paying a sum of Rs.1,23,011/- through cash as per the bills Ex.A-2 to 5 issued by OP and the same has been fixed by spending huge amount i.e., for labour charges, cement, sand, jelly etc., and in all he has incurred a sum of Rs.4,21,011/-.  But after lapse of 3-4 months, the tiles were bending and cracking and the discolouring, due to supply of low quality tiles by the OP.  The complainant approached the OP several times and requested to replace the defective tiles.  The OP agreed to replace the tiles, but later refused to replace the same.  The complainant has informed the OP regarding change of colour and bending of tiles.  OP told the complainant that, the same will be replaced, but never taken any care for rectification of defects in the materials/replace the same. 

9.      In support of his contention, the complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and reiterated the contents of complaint and relied on the documents like Bills for having purchased the materials from OP marked as Ex.A-2 to 5, which shows the complainant has purchased the tiles by paying requisite amount to OP, Office copy of the legal notice dated 23.08.2017 issued by the complainant to the OP calling upon to rectify the defective materials supplied marked as Ex.A-6, Reply to the notice marked as Ex.A-8 and Photo copies showing shading of colour and breaking of the tiles marked as Ex.A-1.  After purchasing the materials from OP, the complainant has laid the same in his newly constructed first floor house.  But, within three to four months of laying the same, the colour of the tiles was shaded and breaking.  When the complainant has orally intimated to the OP with regard to the defects in the material, by that time, the OP promised the complainant to solve the problems, but failed to fulfil its promise, which is a deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.  Hence, the OP has committed a deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and the complainant is entitled to get the relief.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.          

 

            10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that the OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,23,011/- along with interest @ 9% p.a from the date of complaint till realization.

It is further ordered that the OP is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards labour charges and Rs.40,000/- towards cement, sand, jelly etc., and Rs.10,000/- towards transport charges, in all a sum of Rs.90,000/-.

It is further ordered that, the OP is hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings.

It is further ordered that, the OP is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 21/12/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP:

DW-1:  Sri. JayanthiLal, Proprietor of OP by way of affidavit evidence. 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Photo copies
02	Ex-A-2 & 3:-	Bills dated 16.03.2016
03	Ex-A-4 & 5:-	Bills on white paper
04	Ex-A-6:-	Legal Notice dated 23.08.2017
05	Ex-A-7:-	Postal Acknowledgement
06	Ex-A-8:-	Reply notice

 

Documents marked on behalf of OP:

-NIL-

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**