Mrs. Rekha Gupta, Member—Revision petition no. 4047 of 2006 has been filed under section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the judgment and order dated 12.10.2006 passed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ahmedabad (‘the State Commission’) in First Appeal no. 741 of 2006.

2. The brief facts of the case as per the complaint of the respondent no. 1 and 2/ complainant no. 1 and 2 are as follows:

3. Respondent no. 1 is a Girls Hostel namely Lourdes Society and the said Society registered under Society Registration Act, vide society Registration no. Guj/ 525/ Surat and also registered under Trust Act vide its Trust Registration no. F/ 430/ Surat.

4. The respondent had purchased the dirty shade in 30 x 30 ivory floor glazed tiles from petitioner no. 5 who is a local agent of petitioner no. 1 -company through its Sales Department of petitioner no. 4. The said goods of tiles were delivered by petitioner no. 3 to the respondent. The particulars of goods of tiles which purchased by respondent are as under:

S.No. Date Invoice no. Bill/ D O no. Amount in Rs.

1. 02.02.2000 006932 6811 1,12,480/-

2. 18.02.2000 007283 7164 1,04,000/-

3. 02.03.2000 07643 7522 93,933/-

4. 24.03.2000 8107 808 1,17,166/-

5. 06.03.2001 8810 8187 42,000/-

TOTAL 4,69,579/-

5. At the time of purchasing the above mentioned goods of tiles, the petitioner company had also given a guarantee of quality of goods of tiles and as per the guarantee given by the petitioner no. 1 company. After purchasing the said tiles from the petitioner company, the respondent had started affixing the said tiles on flooring by using material and spend the labour charges. After fixing the said goods of tiles within a year, the said tiles fixed on 1st and 2nd floor of the respondent Hostel premises started developing white spots and the glazed surface of the tiles was damaged. Thereafter, the respondent has written letters on September 01, 23.05.2002 and on 28.06.2002 to Sales Executive of petitioner no. 4 bearing bill no. 6811, 7522 and 8008 of goods of tiles dated 02.02.2000, 02.03.2000 and 24.03.2000 with regard to the defective, inferior quality of tiles which had developed white spots and damage to the glazed surface. The petitioner no. 5/OP No. 5 who is the local agent of opponent company and the Sales of the said goods of titles “ K Sthapatya – Kamal Tiles” also visited their site and verified the tiles and they also agreed with respondent regarding defective quality of glazed tiles supplied by petitioner company as the defect started appearing on glazed surface of first floor and second floor of respondent premises. The petitioner company did not give proper attention and have not taken any action to solve the complaint regarding dirty shade in 30x30 ivory floor tiles. The petitioner company has not even given any reply to the said letters and also not given any response and taken subsequent action regarding those letters. The respondent had contacted the licenciate and registered architect Mr J M Vimawala who is a local architect interior designer for estimation of removing of old flooring tiles and application of new flooring material. The said architect and interior designer also issued certificate regarding estimation of the substandard and inferior quality of first/ second flooring tiles and application of New Flooring Material total damaged including material plus labour (Rs.1,20,745.92+ 31,952.60+ 61,950.60+ 1,94,418.36 = 3,99,077.37 plus octroi and transport charges Rs.28,635/-. Total amount of Rs.4,27,712.37 as damages).

6. Thereafter the respondent has given a legal notice on dated 12.08.2002 to petitioner, by registered post AD for recovery of said amount Rs.4,27,712.37 with interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The said notice was received by petitioner no. 4 on 14.08.2002, petitioner no. 2 on behalf of petitioner no. 1 company on 16.08.2002 and petitioner no. 3 on dated 17.08.2002, but after receiving the said notice b