Decided on April 11,2008

Gujarat Gold Coin Ceramic Tiles Limited Appellant
Nandakishor Tulshidas Katore Respondents


- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment passed by District Consumer Forum Nashik in complaint No. 190/2004 dated 5.1.2006 whereby the O.P. has been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,02,000 towards defective tiles supplied to the complainant. He has been further directed to pay Rs. 10,000 towards cost.
(2.) THE case of the parties in the Forum below may be stated as under: The complainant has filed complaint alleging that for construction of his hospital in December 2002 he had given contract to M/s. Parijat Construction. M/s. Parijat Construction had purchased 500 boxes of ceramic tiles from the O.P. -Company. However, it was found that soon after the tiles were laid, tiles had some cracks. He therefore got the tiles examined through the Expert of MERI. The expert of MERI sent report. Thereafter he sent registered notice to the O.P. Despite notice, the Company did not bother to settle the claim of the complainant for the defective tiles supplied by it and therefore he filed consumer complaint and claimed Rs. 1,02,000 as cost of the tiles and Rs. 75,000 the expenses incurred for laying down the tiles in his hospital and also claimed Rs. 50,000 towards mental harassment. The complainant has filed some documents on record in support of his claim.
(3.) THE O.P. filed written statement and denied all the allegations made against it. According to the O.P. tiles were used after the 11 months since the date of purchase. The tiles purchased by M/s. Parijat Construction were of commercial grade (2nd Grade) and there was no guarantee given for these tiles. The complainant had not done crazing test on the tiles. The report of the expert from MERI (Maharashtra Engineer Research Institute, Nashik) was proving the case of the complainant. The Company pleaded that only for standard and first quality tiles, they are giving guarantee and it has been mentioned on each box of the tiles that after the tiles are laid down or affixed on the floor, no complaint of defective tiles could be entertained. Therefore, the Company pleaded that the complaint should be dismissed with cost. In the course of proceeding, District Consumer Forum was pleased to appoint Court Commissioner, who also submitted her report after inspecting the tiles at the hospital of the complainant. The report is dated 18.8.2005. O.P. also filed affidavits and documents in support of its defence.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.