M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties having failed in their attempt to resist the consumer complaint, brought by the respondent/complainant, have come to this Commission for redressal, challenging the order.
(2.) The complainant had purchased flooring materials under the brand name BAMVUD manufactured by the first opposite party, marketed through the Agent-second opposite party, after negotiation, paying consideration, which was laid in their Farm House near Beach with the help of the second opposite party alone, in September 2003. To the shock and surprise of the complainant, within few months time, the entire flooring was eaten by termites, which was reported to the second opposite party on 29.10.2004, demanding the amount spent namely Rs.45,000/- immediately, for which, he directed the complainant to contact the first opposite party, who had taken the plea that anti termite treatment ought to have been taken by the complainant at the building site, for which, they cannot be held responsible, on the condition Non-toxic anti pests Boric Acid Treatment alone. The goods manufactured and supplied by the opposite parties does not meet the quality promised, thereby they have committed unfair trade practice, offending the warranty period also, causing mental agony, which was not rectified even after the legal notice, thereby the complainant was constrained to file this case to recover the cost of the defective flooring material, as well replacement costs, totaling a sum of Rs.1 lakh.
(3.) The first opposite party admitting the manufacturing of flooring material named BAMVUD as well, its purchase by the complainant in a way, resisted the case inter alia contending that they have not given any guarantee for termite proof and if at all, the complainant himself have treated the floor for antitermite treatment, which they failed, that the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction since the first opposite party is in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, that only due to lack of knowledge on the part of the complainant in failing to give adequate treatment for termites, if at all the flooring material should have been damaged, for which, the opposite parties cannot be held responsible since there was no warranty and the warranty was only against manufacturing defect, praying for the dismissal of the complainant, denying other averments also.;