DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 4^th day April, 2023

Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V.,  President

            : Smt.Vidya A., Member           

            : Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member         Date of filing: 23/04/2022     

CC/69/2022

P. Haridas

S/o Sivaraman Nair 

Happy Tales, House No.12/284

Njayarazhchakkavu, Kannadi

Palakkad - 678 701

(Party in person)                                                   -             Complainant

Vs

Vinodkumar V

Vismaya Tiles & Purchase

Kazhchaparambu, Near SBI

Kannadi P.O – 678 701                                        -             Opposite party

(Ex-parte)

O R D E R

By Sri.Krishnankutty.N.K., Member.

1.  Pleadings of the Complainant.

The opposite party was entrusted with the work of paving interlock tiles in front of the complainant's house at the rate of Rs. 62/square feet.  Total area was 831 square feet and the complainant paid an advance of Rs. 25,000/- on 15/12/2021 and the balance Rs. 26,000/- on 18/12/2021 after completion of the work.

In January, it was found that many tiles were damaged and some were caved in to soil.  When informed the opposite party, he changed the caved in tiles and charged Rs. 1600/- as cooli charges.  He also agreed to change the broken tiles afterwards.  Inspite of continuous follow up through phone calls and whatsapp messages, the opposite party didn't rectify the defects. Instead, he visited the site along with another person and told that the damage caused is due to the movement of heavy vehicles on the tiles after laying and not because of manufacturing defects.  The complainant sent a registered notice to the opposite party indicating all the above facts, but the defects remain to be rectified.  Hence the complaint.  His prayer is for a total compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards financial loss, mental agony, cost etc.

2.   Notice was issued to the opposite party.  He entered appearance and filed version denying the allegations. His contention is that the tiles were damaged due to improper unloading of tiles from the tipper lorry and due to the movement of very heavy vehicles such as JCB over the tiles.  This kind of tiles used for laying in the front yard is not meant for movement of such heavy vehicles and this was informed to the complainant before starting the laying work.

However, the opposite party changed some of the damaged tiles as a goodwill gesture but the complainant has not paid the labour charge of Rs. 1,600/- which he had agreed to pay.

3.  Issues framed.

1. Whether the damage to the interlock tiles laid on the premises of the complainant is due to poor quality of tiles?
2. Whether there is any deficiency or unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
4. Reliefs /costs permissible if any?

4.   The parties were called for adalath held on 29/07/2022 & 26/08/2022, but failed to reach any settlement.

5.   The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Ext. A1 to A3 as evidence.  The opposite party had been continuously absent and was hence set ex-parte.  Ext. A1 & A2 are the print outs of the mobile messages proving the payments made by the complainant to the opposite party.  A3 is the copy of the regd. letter sent to the opposite party.

6.  Issues 1 to 4 

The Ext. A1 &A2 are the records of the payment made by the complainant for the work which has been admitted by the opposite party and the Ext. A3 is the registered letter sent to the opposite party asking him to rectify the defects.  But the complainant has not adduced any evidence to prove that the tiles paved were of inferior quality and that is the reason for the damages caused. Further he didn't take any steps to get an expert commissioner appointed to ascertain the facts or to take evidence from any witness in order to conclusively prove that the damages were caused due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

7.   Hence, it can be concluded that the complainant failed to prove his case and therefore the complaint is dismissed.

Pronounced in open court on this the 4^th day of April, 2023.

                                                                                                 Sd/-          

                                                                                       Vinay Menon V

                                                              President 

                                                                      Sd/-

                                                               Vidya A

                                      Member 

                                                                                                               Sd/-

                                                                                              Krishnankutty N.K.

                                                                                                      Member

Appendix

Documents marked from the side of the Complainant.

Ext. A1: Printouts of transaction receipts for Rs. 10,000/-& Rs. 15,000/-dated

             15/12/2021.

Ext. A2: Printout of transaction receipt for Rs. 26,000/- dated 18/12/2021.

Ext. A3: Copy of the letter dated 11/04/2022 sent by the complainant to the

             opposite party.

Documents marked from the side of opposite party: Nil

Witness examined: Nil

Cost: Nil

NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.