IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President Smt.K.P.Prethakumari: Member Smt.M.D.Jessy: Member Dated this, the 15th day of September 2009 OP.133/05 B.A.Ali, Kerala Offset Printing Agency, Harris Quarters,C.H.Road, Complainant Zaid Nagar, Taliparamba.P.O. (Rep. by67 Adv.M.K.Venugopal) M.P.Rajendran, Proprietor, Keayer Printgraphs, Opposite party 106/A/4,Kamarajar Road, Opp.MasterPrinters Association, Sivakasi (Rep. by Adv.K.Unnikrishnan) O R D E R Sri.K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under sectin12 of consumer protection act for an order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- with interest at 18% from25.11.04 till the date of payment and compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and cost. The case of the complainant is that the opposite party is running an offset printing press at Sivakashi and have its branch at Coimbatore as Keyar Printographs. The complainant is an agent for offset printing work as “Kala Offset printing agency” and canvases orders for offset printing works from various customers and getting done through such printers. The opposite party’s son Mr.Mani came out at Taliparamba and took orders on behalf of opposite party for 3000 colour calendars having the size 20 x 30. Consisting of five columns in130 GSM art paper during November 2004 and the order was of M/s. Thuluvananickal pipes Pvt. Ltd. at Taliparamba who are manufactures of RCC spun pipes and other cement products. The amount to be paid is Rs.42,000/- and he received Rs.25,000/- as Demand draft drawn from federal bank Ltd., Taliparamba Branch with a promise that the item would be delivered by 23.12.04 and then the balance will be collected. It was specifically with a direction under neatly printed in accordance with the specifications. But the opposite party failed to deliver the items in time and hence contacted through phone to which he responded that he would not keep up the time due to cash shortage and insisted for further payment of Rs.15, 000/- which was paid through ICICI bank, Kannur branch on 25.11.04. But the bundle was reached the complainant’s station only on 8.12.04, after a delay of 20 days. When the bundle was opened, it could be seen that the printing was done not in accordance with the specification and was found defective i.e. Instead of using 5 colours used only 4 colours whereby gained Rs.3000/- the cost of one column. The figures and the pictures available on the calendar look awkward and it lacks clarity. Most of the figures are printed vaguely resembling shadow, the pages of calendar were piled up before the impression are dried, the ink of such wet impression spread on the folios that were kept on the wet prints and a quantitative reduction of number of calendar. Against the orders of 3000 numbers he had dispatched only 2,800 and hence the party refused to take delivery of the items. According to the complainant, the calendars are considered to be memento and a neat and elegant calendar would serve the purpose the better, but presenting the work of opposite party would work negatively. The complainant had incurred Rs.40,000/-,7500/- for printing film Rs.3125/- for fee and haulting charge for proof reading for 8 days. Rs.2500/- for delivery expenses and Rs.950/- for charges to contact the opposite party. When he delayed the customer required to pay back the sum which was spent by him. All these lost was caused due to the defective service of the opposite party. Hence this complaint. On receiving notice from the Forum the opposite party appeared through Adv.K.Unnikirishnan and filed version. The opposite party admits that they are running an offset printing press at Sivakasi as Keayar Printographs. They denied all the contentions of the complainant that the opposite party’s son Mani came at Taliparamba and took orders for 3000 colour calenders having the size 20 X 30 with five colours in 130 GSM art paper during 2004. He further denied the receipt of Rs.25, 000/-as advance, payment of Rs.15, 000/- through ICICI Bank etc. They further contended that with the intention of extracting money from the opposite party, the complainant has filed the complaint. The complainant came to opposite party’s place and ordered for supply of calendar the opposite party has rejected the complainant’s offer because of low rate. So the complaint is filed as a revenge for that refusal. They further contended that the complainant is not a consumer and only a commission agent and hence the Forum has no jurisdiction to try the case. Hence the complaint; is liable to be dismissed. Upon the above contention the following issues have been raised for consideration. 1. Whether the complainant is a consumer? 2. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of opposite party? 3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any remedy? 4. Relief and cost. The evidence in this case consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A12. Issue No.1 The opposite party has raised a contention that the complainant is not a consumer but only a commission agent. But the Ext.A1 dt.19.11.04 was issued by opposite party in the name of the complainant and it shows that there was an order for printing 3000 calendars having 20 x 30 with 5 Colours in 130 GSM paper and it has a total amount of Rs.42,000/- and advance Rs.25,000/-.” DD and balance is Rs.17, 000/-. But opposite party disputed the Ext.A1 by saying that it is not an order form and in the order form some more matters to be depicted . But they have not produced a specimen copy of order form to prove their contention moreover they have no case that the Ext.A1 was not issued by the opposite party. Further in ext.A9 which is the reply notice issued by opposite party, it was stated that “the complainant himself purchased printing materials and handed over to the opposite party for printing and was fully satisfied in printing works and thereafter he had paid coli to opposite party”. This clearly shows that the opposite party himself admits that the complainant had availed some service of opposite party. It is true that the complainant had availed service of opposite party for Thuluvanical pipes. So as per section 2(1) (d) (ii) of the act a consumer means any person who hires or avails any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service, when such service availed of with the approval of such person.; So opposite party is a consumer. Besides the opposite party contended that the complainant had purchased goods for commercial purposes. But from the circumstances of the case and going through the pleadings and documents, it is clear that the complainant is doing his job by collecting orders for printing purposes. Which meant taking orders from the parties and return back materials printed? The opposite party has no case that the complainant has other means for livelihood. So the opposite party failed to prove the contention that the complainant has been working as a commission agent for printing materials for commercial purpose. Above all, it can be seen that the complainant had availed the service of opposite party and hence we are of the opinion that the complaint is a consumer of opposite party and the complaint is maintainable. Hence this Forum has ample power to try the case. The issue No.1 is found in favour of the complainant. Issue No.2 to 4 The other contention of the complainant is that he had entrusted for printing 3000 calendars having size of 20 X 30 of five colours in 130 GSM art paper during November 2004 for an amount of Rs.42,000/-. But the opposite party given delivery of 2800 calendars having only 4 colours with the figure of the picture look awkward, printed vaguely resembling shadows, and impression spread on the folio. But the opposite party denied totally by saying that the complainant is not known to him. But while going through the Ext.A9 reply notice dt.24.1.05 which was issued by opposite party’s counsel to the complainant’s counsel it is seen the above said version of the opposite party is utter lie. Opposite party disputed Ext.A9 document by saying that it was a forged one. But the complainant has produced its cover with postal receipt dt.24.1.05 issued from Sri.Villiputtur to Taliparamba i.e. to complainant’s counsel. Opposite party has no case that they had issued some other letters through that cover on the same day. So the genuinity of Ext.A9 cannot be disbelieved at all. So the Ext.A9 proves that complainant has entrusted some work for printing to opposite party. The Ext.A1 proves the case of the complainant that he has entrusted to opposite party for printing materials and has given Rs.25, 000/- as advance even though the opposite party has contended that it is not an order form, they have no case that they had not issued the Ext.A1.Ext.A2 is a pay in slip through which the complainant had deposited Rs.15, 000/- in Sivakasi branch of ICICI bank in Account No.617205007127. But no documents were produced to show that it is the ac count number of opposite party. Ext.A3 and A4 are cash receipt issued from ABT parcel service, which proves that some parcels are issued for delivery to ‘Thuluvanical pipes at Taliparamba.Ext.A4 (2) are a way bill of the same parcel service. Ext.A3 to A5 shows that some goods are entrusted from Keayar to deliver to the Thuluvanical Pipes. So these documents prove that some materials are printed from Keyar printers and issued to Thuluvanikal pipes. Ext.A1 and the admission of opposite party in Ext.A9proves that these printed materials are those which entrusted by the complainant to opposite party. Ext.A5 is the alleged calendar produced by the complainant. It looks awkward and untidy as alleged. There is nothing in the calendar to connect the opposite party. But in the bottom of the calendars, it was printed as “Kala Offset printing Agencies, Taliparamba” with phone Number. So we can infer by considering the available evidence that the same was printed at opposite party’s press. So we are of the opinion that there is some deficiency on the part of opposite party in printing the calendars. Even, if the contention of opposite party that Ext.A1 is not an order form, opposite party is liable for the defective printing work since he has admitted that he had printed some calendrs for opposite party as per Ext.A10. Ext.A10 is also issued to the Thuluvanical Pipes. So opposite party is liable for the defective service rendered by them to the complainant. No documents are produced by the complainant to show that the printed item will be supplied on 23.11.04. So the version that there caused delay in supplying cannot be accepted. So the opposite party is liable to pay Rs.40,000/- as the charge incurred by the complaint for printing and Rs.10,000/- as compensation with Rs.500/- as cost of this proceedings and the complainant is entitled to receive the same. Issues 2 to 4 are found in favour of complainant. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to pay Rs.40, 000/- (Rupees Forty thousand only) as charge for printing materials with Rs.10000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation along with Rs.500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) as cost of this proceedings to the complaint within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of consumer protection act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1receipt dt.19.11.04 issued by OP A2.Pay in slip issued from ICICI Bank Kannur A3.Cash receipt issued by the agent ABT parcel service A4.Delivery receipt issued by the agent ABT parcel service A5.Calender A6to A8. Copy of the Lawyer notice sent to OP, postal receipt and AD card A9.Reply notice A10.Cooli invoice issued by OP A11.DD receipt issued from federal Bank A12.Postal receipt and AD Exhibits for the opposite party: Nil Witness examined for the complainant /forwarded by order/ PW1.Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party: Nil Senior Superintendent Consumer disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur
......................GOPALAN.K
......................JESSY.M.D
......................PREETHAKUMARI.K.P | | 
