Date of filing : 01-03-2013
Date of order : 22-12-2014
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.72/2013
Dated this, the 22nd day of December 2014
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
Raju Mathai, : Complainant
Mailaikkal, C/o. Toney Texs,
Bheemanadi.Po. 671314,
Kasaragod.
(In Person)
Manager, Malayala Manorama weekly, : Opposite party
P.B.No.26, Kottayam. 686001.
(Adv.Benny Jose, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL, MEMBER
The complainant’s case is that he was a subscriber of Malayala Manorama weekly which contains 5 novels and after the completion of each episode there are questionnaire with three answers. The readers who are interested in participating the contest shall answer any of the three answers given by the opposite party. The questions were so silly that can be answered by any person. The answers to the questions shall send by SMS to the given number and Rs. 2/- will be charged per SMS, by this way the opposite party earn a very big amount out of this type of contest. Another serious contention in the complaint is that the weekly doesnot publish about the prize and winners name of the contests also. Even the opposite party failed to give a specific answer to the complainant about what sort of prize will be distributed to the winners when he personally contacted the opposite party and thereby the acts of the opposite party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
2. The opposite party appeared through Adv.Benny Jose and filed version contended that the complainant filed the above complaint without any authority and he made some calculation like an idiot and which are not at all sustainable and without any logic. The contest is free and voluntary and nobody is compelling anybody to participate the campaign is run only for readers participation to test their IQ and General knowledge. Further contended that the winner of each contest will be given appropriate prizes and their name and address will be published. The allegation that the revenue received from the SMS go to the opposite party is absolutely false and incorrect. The opposite party herein furnished the details of charges and revenue for a single SMS from major operators and contended that there is absolutely no latches or deceptions on the part of the opposite party and therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
3. Complainant was examined as PW1. Exts A1 to A3 were marked and the Manager Assistant content producer was examined as DW1 on behalf of the editor in charge of Malayala Manorama Weekly to give evidence and Exts B1 to B3 also were marked.
4. Now the points for consideration are:
1 Whether any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2 If so, what the relief and cost?
5. Points.No.1&2: On analizing the evidence before the Forum, and also on perusal of the documents marked before us, the forum finds the following.
It is true that on the basis of Ext.A2 the allegation in the complaint that after each episode of the novels there are some questions and options for correct answers were given as A,B, C and the mode of sending SMS is also given in the advertisement with number in which SMS has to be sent. In the affidavit filed in lieu of chief examination discloses some other allegations also which is not mentioned in the complaint such as a contest related to Sachin Tendulker’s Score,i.e. those who predict the score of Sachin will win a Hundai Grand Car. The winner of that particular contest was published in the news paper and the same was marked as Ext.A1. As per Ext.A1 535636 SMS were received in the contest and out of these 1804 predicted the score correctly. In the last portion of the Ext.A1 mentioned that 100 Consolation prize will be given to other participants but it is highly pertinent to note that what is the consolation prize and name of the winner are not disclosed in Ext.A1. Ext. A3 is Malayala Manorama Weekly which published about a malayalee beauty contest and in that advertisement itself the opposite party gave an opportunity to participate in that contest and those who win the contest would be given an opportunity to be the cover girl of the opposite party magazine. All these contest are based on SMS, the complainant specifically alleges that any of the contest discloses about the prize. By analyzing the Exhibits it is crystal clear that some ambiguities are there in the advertisements for the above mentioned contest and it lacks transparency which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
6. Moreover, the forum is literally shocked to see the way how opposite party filed the version by using some highly humiliating words and sentences. No doubt that opposite party has every right to contest the case but it doesn’t means that the opposite party can address the complainant as idiot and fool. In the chief examination itself the complainant pointed out that these words were highly humiliating one. Forum also feels that the opposite party is not a person who can address the complainant in such a manner since opposite party is a press who upholds the great values, tradition and heritage. According to World Association of News Papers as of 2011, Malayala Manorama hold a position as top 11th most circulating news paper in the world and according to the Audit Bureau of Circulation (ABC) 2013 figures, it is the fourth largest circulating news papers in India and the largest circulating news papers in Kerala.
7. Fair words make you Lords and evil words make you devils. Press is called the 5th estate and is said to be the Apostle of what is fair. But unfortunately the version filed by the press icon like Malayala Manorama with cherished values, noble and long standing appears to be not used so civilized words. The tone and tenor of opposite party’s words are not all in tune and consonance with the rich tradition followed by Manorama. To quote re-nowned tamil poet Thiruvallur, “it is strange indeed that peoples speak harsh words when they have themselves felt and experience the joy that the kindly speech of others bigets in them. Every moment we have direct personal experience of the marvelous effect of kind words from others, yet when we speak ourselves, we forget it and indulg in harsh speech. It is not foolish to pick unripe berries when ripe ones can be had for plucking? Equally foolish, it is to choose the words that hurts when gentle words are available”.
8. Therefore the forum finds that the acts of opposite party is not all justifiable one and misleading an unfair advertisement violates several basic rights of consumers and it amounts to unfair trade practice.
In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- as compensation with cost of Rs.5000/-. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
A1. News Paper November 24th 2013
A2. 9th March 2013 Manorama Weekly
A3.4th January 2014 Manorama weekly.
B1.Authorization letter
B2.SMS Billing and Collection for July 13
B3.SMS Billing and Collection for August ‘13
PW1.Raju Mathai
DW1.Amin seethy.P.S.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
