Haryana

StateCommission

A/1157/2016

MANOJ - Complainant(s)

Versus

BIRDAL PHOTO LAB - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

22 Dec 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

First Appeal No  :      1157 of 2016

Date of Institution:      05.12.2016

Date of Decision :      22.12.2016

Manoj age 45 years son of Sh. Dayanand 89, Jain Gali, Hisar.

                             Appellant-Complainant

Versus

Bindal Photo Lab, Near Neelam Industries, Tilak Bazar, Hisar

Respondent-Opposite Party

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

Present:               Appellant in person

                                                   O R D E R

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

          Manoj-complainant is in appeal against the order dated November 11^th, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hisar (for short ‘District Forum’) vide which the complaint filed by him was dismissed.

2.      Complainant filed complaint alleging that on 16.08.2015 he got prepared two post card size photographs (prints) from Bindal Photo Lab, Hisar-opposite party.  He was charged Rs.50/- but the opposite party did not return negative to him.  However, opposite party offered to give him a chip containing photos on payment of Rs.200/-. Hence the complainant filed complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

3.      Opposite party appeared and contested the complaint by filing written version and denied the averments of the complaint and pleaded that since no film is used in the digital camera therefore, there was no question of any negative being prepared or handed over to the complainant. Complainant was offered by the opposite party to transfer the data from digital camera in the pen drive on payment.  However, the complainant instead of doing so, threatened the opposite party to file complaint. and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      Indisputably, the photo was clicked with the Digital camera and no negative is prepared.  It is also not disputed that the complainant paid Rs.50/- for two prints as is apparent from the bill placed on file.

5.      The internet generated copy regarding working and mechanism of digital camera is as under:-

“Digital cameras look very much like ordinary film cameras but they work in a completely different way. When you press the button to take your  photograph with a digital camera, an aperture opens at the front of the camera and light streams in through the lens. So far, it is just the same as a film camera. From this point on, however, everything is different. There is no film in a digital camera. Instead, there is a piece of 

6.        Complainant appeared in person.  Complainant has placed on the file bill for Rs.50/-.  Perusal of the bill shows that opposite party has charged Rs.50/- for two prints of photographs size 4x6 which the opposite party has handed over to him. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service.  Rather it is misuse of the process of law by the complainant.  Therefore, the order passed by the District Forum requires no interference, hence, the appeal is dismissed.