Thrissur District Commission holds tile manufacturer and its dealer liable for lack of maintenance due to discolouration and discoloration of tiles

Background facts

The complainant purchased the color IVORY Shiv Cera vitrified tiles from the other party’s 1st dealer in two installments. On August 8, 2016, he bought 163 units for Rs. 26,480 and on August 17, 2016, he purchased another 50 units for Rs. 8,050 plan to use them for domestic purposes.

After the tiles were laid, they started to show discoloration and stains. Despite repeated complaints, the 1st counterparty only sent a representative to inspect the tiles, who confirmed that titles are of poor quality. On October 3, 2016, the complainant requested the 1st opposite party to replace the tiles or refund the costs, but his request was ignored.

The complainant alleged that there was a deficiency in service provision and unfair commercial practices on the part of the counterparties. Therefore, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Thrissur, Kerala, seeking an order to the opposite parties to refund the amount paid by him for the tiles along with compensation and costs.

Observation by the Commission

The Commission noted that the expert commissioner appointed by the Commission agreed that the tiles were of inferior quality and had undergone extensive discoloration and that certain tiles were also stained.

The Commission found that the first opposing dealer did not inform the complainant of the poor quality of the tiles at the time of sale, thereby depriving the complainant of his fundamental rights. This constituted a deficiency in service and an unfair business practice by the dealer.

The Commission found that the second opposing manufacturer misrepresented the quality of the tiles. They claimed the tiles were stain-free and suitable for use in high-traffic areas such as hotels and hospitals, but the tiles showed significant discoloration and were of inferior quality.

In addition, the provision on the packaging that complaints must be submitted within 10 days was unreasonable, because tile quality can only be assessed after installation and use. These actions constitute unfair trade practices and lack of service by the second counterparty.

The Commission has directed the opposite parties to jointly and severally pay the complainant a total amount of Rs. 34,530 as refund for the amount paid to purchase the tiles, Rs. 51,200 for labor costs relating to removal and re-laying of new tiles, Rs. 50,000 for the pain, hardship and financial losses suffered, and Rs. 15,000 as legal costs with 9% interest.

Case – Thomas Pullani Valappil vs. Owner, Ukkens Build All and Shah Tiles Pvt. Ltd

Quote – CC 630/16

Click here to read/download the order