1. As per contents of instant petition/claim, the complainant Mahmood Anwar Dhoodi purchased Tiles and basin for the decoration of his home, when complainant installed aforesaid tiles and basin, which were found substandard, after having installed the tiles, its shining ended and colour became faint and also some scratches were seen as the aforesaid material was found defective while it was wrongly told and shown as of high quality. Likewise it was also allegedly that the Basin (Decor every) was also found cracked and broken. The complainant approached the respondent in order to get replaced the defective items, but the respondent not only refused but also misbehaved with the petitioner, for which the complainant suffered a lot of problems on account of aforesaid defective items. Respondent was also served through legal notice but he did not pay any heed to respond the same lastly the complainant moved the court for recovery of Rs, 24418/- as the cost of defective items, litigation fee, compensation and damages allegedly suffered by him.
2. The respondent was summoned who made his appearance through the learned counsel on 10.11.2010 and written reply was also submitted. The case has been adjourned for the evidence of petitioner on the request of both the parties on one pretext or the other and lastly on 17.03.2011 when the petitioner alongwith learned counsel was present in the court but no one turned up on behalf of respondent despite repeated calls, so he was proceeded against ex-parte and case was adjourned for the ex-parte evidence of petitioner. ON 28.03.2011 the ex-parte evidence of petitioner was recorded. The statement of petitioner as Pw-1 and one Shehzad Farooq as Pw-2 was recorded.
3. Likewise petitioner produced the original purchase receipts as Ex.A-1, 02 & 03, Legal Notice as Ex.A- 4, copy of receipt of post office as Ex-A-5 and acknowledgement as Ex-A-6 and closed petitioner's evidence.
4. Ex-parte arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner heard and record available on the file, perused.
5. The petitioner in support of his version put forth in the instant petition, got recorded his statement as Pw-1 while one Shehzad Farooq as pw-2 has fully supported the version of the petitioner through his statement.
6. As already stated the respondent after making his appearance before the court and submitted his written reply has been joining the court proceedings but lastly absented himself and did not defend the case. So, there is no rebuttal at all to the aforesaid evidence of the petitioner. Petitioner has succeeded to establish his claim, regarding the defective items 1stly 14 meter tiles (every colour) amounting to Rs, 10150/- 2ndly 3.24 meter tiles amounting to Rs, 2268/-, 3rdly one basin set (Decor every) amounting to Rs, 12000/- as per purchase receipts issued by the respondent himself.
7. While details of any loss due to said defective items suffered by the petitioner have not been given.
8. So, the claim of the petitioner as to damages has not been established. However, the petitioner is entitled for Rs, 24418/- as the cost of defective items, litigation fee amounting to Rs, 5000/- and Rs, 10000/- as compensation.
9. For the foregoing reasons the respondent is directed to pay total amount Rs, 39418/- the petitioner.
10. File be consigned to record room after due completion.