DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM. BOLANGIR.
………………………
Presents:-
- Sri P.Samantara, President.
- Sri G.K.Rath, Member.
- Sri S.Rath, Member.
Dated, Bolangir the 31st day of August 2016.
C.C.No.74 of 2015.
Raghunath Rath, aged about 45 yerars son of late Nabin Kumar Rath,
Residet of Raghunathpara, Titilagarh, P.O/P.S- Titilagarh, District-
Bolangir.
.. .. .. Complainant.
-Versus-
1.M/s. Goyel Brothers, Prakash Educational Publishers,
At- 11/1908,Chuna Mandi Paharganj, New Delhi-110055.
2.The Principal, St. Anne’s School, Titilagarh,
P.O/P.S-Titilagarh, Dist- Bolangir.
.. .. .. Opp.Parties.
Adv. for the complainant- None.
Adv.for the O.P.No.1 - Sri A.K.Thanapati & Associates.
Adv.for the O.P.No.2 - None.
Date of filing of the case – 07.10.2015
Date of order - 31.08.2016
JUDGMENT.
Sri P.Samantara, President.
In adumbrate, the complainant is the father of the consumer as being a minor. A student, St. Ann’s School, Titilagarh and read class’X’.
2. The chemistry book published and circulated by the Schools reveals that on chapter HCL, HCL is prepared by reaction of metallic chloride with Con. Sulphoric Acid bearing at a temperature below 200 degree Celsius, the product formed will sodium sulphate (Na2So4) and HCL, where as the next page, it is written as Sodium Hydrogen-Sulphate (NaHSo4) will be formed, if temperature is below 200 degree Celsius, which is contradictory as it is revealed, in case of temperature is below 200 degree Celsius then the product will be sodium bisulphate and not sulphate.
3. The complainant submitted, the publication is circulated through Odisa and India, the molecular mistake is neither trifle nor whimsical ,which affects the readings of numerous students and being penalized with minus marking, which is a publication deficiency not rectified being in knowledge.
4. The complainant added such imperfection in syllabus book is a deficiency of service, creating unnecessary harassment, prayed a ban on selling the book, direction in verification of the content, withdraw the book from market with relief’s as deemed fit and proper.
5. In pursuance, the O.Ps contested by filing written statement, with admission contention and corroboration.
6. The relevant substances of O.P.2 version say; it is admitted, the complainant is a consumer, the book in question is circulated by them.
7. And further admitted, the report from chemistry teacher confirmed that in fact a mistake has crept in the chapter HCL of chemistry book in Class-X,. the method of preparation below 200 degree Celsius and above 200 degree Celsius is different. No confusion now prevailed, same is corrected and true fact is taught to the pupil.
8. Further stated that , the mistake is due to publication and publisher be liable for the mistake, prayed the petition be dismissed against O.P.2.
9. O.P.1 admitted the tenability of complaint relating to subscription and circulation of book and status of a consumer.
10. But contended keeping the dibasic character of sulphuric acid in view. It is to be noted, the description of Na2So4 and NaHSo4 are not two inconsistent facts rather it is the process of chemical reaction under different temperature. The mistake is a trifle matter and case is filed in a whimsical manner.
11. Further contending the complaint petition is devoid of merit and be rejected in limine. Corroboration made in reliance of some internet information download.
12. The petitioner also have filed their evidence by way of affidavit.
13. We have heard arguments advanced at bar and have perused the record.
14. The complainant submission is that when HCL is prepared by reaction of metallic chloride with conc,sulphuric acid heating at a temperature below 200 degree Celsius, the product formed will sodium sulphate and HCL, on the reverse it is written as Sodium Hydrogen-sulphate will be formed if temperature is below 200 decree Celsius, which is contradictory in itself in the book. Further added, then the product will be sodium bisulphate and not sulphate. Reliance made on the printed book print out description of,- PAGE -171.
15. The aforesaid submission of the complainant is admitted by the institution St.Anne’s School and the class teacher of Chemistry and it is corroborated the mistake that crept in the chapter HCL of chemistry book of Class-X, is taught in correction, the mistake is imperfection in the class book for which the liability shall be fixed on the publisher.
16. On the contrary, the O.P.1 contended vehemently that keeping the dibasic character of sulphuric acid, the description ofNa2So4 Sodium Sulphate and NaHSo4 Sodium bisulphate, are not two inconsistent facts rather it is the process of chemical reaction. The mistake is trifle which included in the publication proclamation by the publisher, further it is unintentional, does not harm others, which is evasive reply and simultaneously admissible that although the matter is a trifle one, in fact, such trifle matter attracts minus point in examination of the student, so also it vitiates the child’s mind in planting inconceivable doubt to be cleared in future. So taking the admission of School teacher and publication page print out, we considered the mistake is imperfection, shortcoming in publication and fault committed by the publisher in repeated publication, which is within the provision of the term u/s 2(d) & (f) of the C.P.Act that relates to defect and deficiency.
17. Further the publisher has not produced the book before the forum even not apologized for the mistake nor takes other into faith that the defect that crept in will be rectified within the time frame or in upcoming publication rather contesting on dibasic principle, which is not praise worthy or venerable one. Even entire country is affected by this mistake as also innumerable number of consumers.
18. In view of the complainant’s unflappable evidence that corroborated by the St Anne’s School we are of considered opinion, the petitioner’s allegation of deficiency is evidentially admitted one and committed deficiency in non rendering rectification when the mistake come into force.
ORDER.
(i) The case is allowed on contest. We find no fault with O.P.No.2. We hereby direct the O.P.No.1 to pay the petitioner a sum of Rs 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only towards sustained harassment and mental agony inclusive of compensation and cost within 30 days of this order, failing which @ 9% per annum interest will accrue on the sum till realization.
(ii) Further O.P.1 is directed to sent an apology letter to St Annes’ School Titilagarh and also rectified the mistake in upcoming publication with a copy to St Annes’ High School at free of cost.
ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 31st DAY OF AUGUST 2016.
(S,Rath) (G.K.Rath) (P.Samantara)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT.
