A Delhi consumer commission has ordered Asian Paints to refund Rs 50,000 to a homeowner, besides Rs 10,000 as compensation and another Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs after finding deficiencies in its home painting services and holding the company guilty of unfair trade practices.
A bench comprising president Monika Aggarwal Srivastava and members Dr Rajender Dhar and Ritu Garodia found that the homeowner, who had paid nearly Rs 98,717 in advance for the project, was subjected to substandard execution, prolonged delays and repeated shortcomings that ultimately led him to seek relief before the consumer commission.
“The opposite party (Asian Paints Limited) instead of taking the work himself engaged a third party agency, namely Esy Colour Home Solutions for execution of the work of complainant. Although, payment was made directly to the opposite party (OP), the OP, on its own accord, further outsourced the said work to its agency without the knowledge or consent of the complainant. Such an act, being done behind the back of the complainant, amounts to an unfair trade practice on the part of the OP,” the commission said on May 29.
Asian Paints was directed to compensate a customer after the commission found lapses in service and project execution. (Image generated using AI)
Commission finds multiple deficiencies
- The work was not carried out in a systematic and time-bound manner by Asian Paints, causing mental agony and inconvenience to the complainant.
- Further, the agency had measured approximately 30 per cent excess area, which was later admitted as an error, thereby indicating deficiency in service on the part of Asian Paints.
- It was also noted that there was constant delay and the work progressed in an erratic manner without any clarification by Asian Paints.
- In an email dated February 26, 2016, sent by Navneet Khare to the complainant, various areas were identified for re-doing the paint work with the consent of the complainant.
- The correspondence on record also reflected that Asian Paints used different types of paint, including Royal Shine, contrary to the agreed specifications.
- The photographs placed on record by the complainant clearly depict patchy and substandard work.
- Reliance was also placed on various documents and communications filed by the complainant, which establish deficiency in service and also reflect that the manner in which Asian Paints handled the grievances of the complainant amounted to an unfair trade practice.
Home painting contract turns into consumer dispute
The dispute arose after the complainant engaged Asian Paints for painting work at his residence and paid approximately Rs 98,717 in advance under the company’s home painting solutions service.
According to the complaint, the company had assured the use of specific products, including Royal Shine paint and Asian Wall Putty, while also promising timely completion of the work.
As work progressed, however, the complainant began raising concerns regarding unfinished walls, poor-quality finishes, repeated delays and the deployment of unskilled workers at the site.
Several email exchanges, including ones dated February 26, 2016 and March 2, 2016, showed that defects were repeatedly brought to the company’s attention and assurances were given that corrective measures would be undertaken.
Asian Paints acknowledged certain deficiencies and proposed corrective measures after Holi. The company later offered machine sanding, repainting of specific areas and additional finishing work.
The complainant alleged that measurements were exaggerated by nearly 30 per cent, resulting in excess billing. He further claimed that products ultimately used different from those agreed upon.
The work allegedly remained incomplete even by mid-June 2016. In July 2016, the complainant lodged a higher-level grievance seeking a refund and alleging that he had been misled.
Feeling cheated by the manner in which the project was handled, the complainant sought a refund of Rs 98,761, compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh and litigation expenses.
Asian Paints denied allegations
Asian Paints denied any deficiency in service and argued that the complaint was false, misleading and filed with mala fide intentions.
The company contended that certain changes in paint specifications became necessary due to the condition of the site and that the complainant was offered a refund of the differential amount arising from such changes.
It further argued that delays occurred because the complainant had requested suspension of work due to a housewarming ceremony and later asked the company to resume work after a suitable interval.
According to the company, the quotation was properly prepared, the products were finalised with the complainant’s consent and additional work worth around Rs 15,000 was undertaken without charging extra.
Excess measurements strengthened customer’s case
- The commission also took note of evidence showing that approximately 30 per cent excess area had initially been measured by the agency before the error was later acknowledged.
- According to the commission, this reflected a clear deficiency in service and lent support to the complainant’s allegations of overcharging.
- Photographs filed on record further showed patchy painting and finishing defects, while email correspondence reflected continuing complaints and dissatisfaction with the execution of the project.
- The commission also observed that products different from those originally agreed upon appeared to have been used during the work.
- Observing that the company had outsourced the painting work to a third-party agency without the customer’s knowledge and that the project was marked by delays, poor workmanship, inflated measurements and deviations from the agreed specifications despite repeated complaints and assurances of corrective action, the commission ordered compensation.
Relief granted by commission
While noting that a portion of the work had been completed satisfactorily, the commission held that the complainant was entitled to relief for the deficiencies and unfair trade practices established on record.
Accordingly, Asian Paints was directed to refund Rs 50,000 to the complainant along with interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the complaint.
The company was also directed to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for inconvenience, harassment and unfair trade practices, along with Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs.
Asian Paints has been given two months to comply with the order, which serves as a reminder that companies remain responsible for the quality of services delivered under their brand name, even when the actual execution is carried out through third-party agencies.
(Written by Aparajita Prasad. She is an intern with The Indian Express)
The Delhi consumer commission noted that the agency had measured approximately 30 per cent excess area, thereby indicating deficiency in service on the part of Asian Paints. (Image generated by AI) 
Asian Paints was directed to compensate a customer after the commission found lapses in service and project execution. (Image generated using AI)
Share
