Punjab

Faridkot

CC/16/195

Ansumann - Complainant(s)

Versus

Progressive Book Depot - Opp.Party(s)

Ashu Mittal

07 Nov 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :       195

Date of Institution:  12.07.2016

Date of Decision :    7.11.2016

Ansumann aged about 16 years minor s/o Balwant Garg  s/o Om Parkash r/o # 33, Park Avenue, Faridkot through his natural guardian and real father Balwant

Garg.                                                                                         ...Complainant

                                                           Versus

1. Progressive Book Centre, College Road, Faridkot through its proprietor.

2. National Council for Education Research & Training, NCERT Campus, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi-110016 through its Chief Publisher.

3. Amit Printing Press, D-12 and 13, Industrial Area, Site-A, Mathura (UP) through its Director/Proprietor..............Ops

    

   Complaint under Section 12 of the

   Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

    

   Quorum:     Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

   Sh P Singla, Member.

    

   Present:      Sh Ashu Mittal, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                     Sh Jaswant Singh, Ld Counsel for OP-1,

                      Sh B S Brar, Ld Counsel for OP-2,

                      OP-3 Exparte.

    

    (Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to OPs to pay Rs.90,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment and financial loss to complainant and for litigation expenses.

   2                                             Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he purchased a book of mathematics from OP-1 for Rs.200/- as Ops claim that their books are best for competitive exams and assured of its correctness with no misprinting in books published by them, but when complainant went through the book purchase from OPs, he found that there were many mistakes in that and even there was misprinting and it contained too much errors, which caused great difficulty in solving the sums and due to errors, wrong information and misprinting users have to face great problem and they are misled and resultantly get less marks. After going through the said book, complainant immediately approached the seller and brought the whole fact into his notice, but he refused to accept his fault and also refused to replace or get back the said book. Seller even did not issue bill to complainant for purchased book. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops and has caused harassment and financial loss to complainant for which he is entitled for compensation of Rs.90,000/-. Hence, the complaint.

   3                                      The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 20.07.2016, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

   4                        On receipt of notice, OP-1 appeared in Forum through Counsel and filed reply, wherein he denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that it is abuse to process of law and no cause of action arises against answering OP and even complainant is not the consumer of OP. He has totally denied that book in question is purchased by complainant from him. It is averred that  he is not authorised to sell school, college or academic books of any kind.  OP-1 brought before the Forum that complainant is known to him and on 7.07.2016, he visited the shop of OP-1 and said that he wants to teach a lesson to OP-2 and 3 and asked him to give fake bill just to create evidence and jurisdiction and when OP-1 refused to do so and disclosed that he does not sell books and nor he is authorised to do so and so refused to issue bill. On this complainant showed his arrogance and misbehaved with him in the presence of Bhupinder Singh and Kuldeep Singh and even threatened to teach him a lesson. However, on merits he has denied all the allegations and reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1. He has prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

   5                                OP-2 also filed reply and submitted that there is never any misprinting in the books published by OP-2 as the Organization of OP-2 is committed to the systematic reform and continuous improvement in the quality of its products and it welcomes the suggestions which enable it to undertake further revision and refinement. It is averred that books of NCERT are available on their website ncert.nic.in and contents mentioned by complainant are a copy of textbook as well as copy on the NCERT website. No errors are found in their books. Moreover, complete book and its edition is not provided by complainant. It is further averred that book of complainant is the photocopy of published version of OP-1 and is not the version of OP-2 and complete comparison is required for both the books. It is further asserted that cost of their book is Rs.180/-and not 200/-and complainant should have taken the receipt for payment at the time of its purchase. Counsel for OP-2 alleged that they do not have any wholesale agent on their panel in Faridkot, Punjab and thus, OP-1 is not their empanelled wholesale agent. He has prayed for dismissal of complaint.

   6                                  Op-3 also filed reply and denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-3. It is averred that books published by OP-2 and printed by OP-3 are the best for competitive exams and correct information is given in these books. It is averred that no cause of action arises against OP-3. Moreover, OP-3 is not allowed to make any amendment or corrections in the slides provided by NCERT and upon close scrutiny of book of complainant, it is made out that book in question is not printed by answering OP and  there are no errors or misprints in the books printed by them. Complainant has purchased the said book from local vendor, who did not procure it from NCERT authorised wholesaler. Complainant has purchased pirated version of book, which was not printed by answering OP and moreover, there is no bill on record produced by complaint to prove that he purchased the said book. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. It is pertinent to mention here that after filing reply Op-3 did not appear in the Forum on several hearings fixed for case  and therefore, after making several calls and long waiting, when OP-3 did not appear in the Forum, it was presumed that Op-3 is not interested in pursuing the case and is intentionally avoiding the court and hence, OP-3 was proceeded against exparte at 4.00 pm vide order dt 1.11.2016.

   7                                 Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit  Ex C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to 6 and then, closed the same on behalf of complainant.

   8                              To controvert the allegations of complainant, Ld Counsel for OP-1 tendered in evidence affidavit of Prem Kumar as Ex OP-1/1 and then closed the evidence on behalf of OP-1.

   9                         Ld Counsel for OP-2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Shridhar Srivastava as Ex OP-2/1  and documents Ex OP-2/2 to 2/3 and then also closed the evidence on behalf of OP-2.

   10                                                We have heard the ld counsel for complainant and Ops and have carefully gone through the evidence and record available on file.

   11                                           Ld Counsel for complainant has vehementally argued that he purchased a book of mathematics from OP-1 for Rs.200/- as Ops claim that their books are best for competitive exams and assured of its correctness with no misprinting in books published by them, but when complainant went through the book purchase from OPs, he found that there were many mistakes in that and even there was misprinting and it contained too much errors, which caused great difficulty in solving the sums and due to errors, wrong information and misprinting users have to face great problem and they are misled and resultantly get less marks. After going through the said book, complainant immediately approached the seller and brought the whole fact into his notice, but he refused to accept his fault and also refused to replace or get back the said book. Seller even did not issue bill to complainant for purchased book. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of Ops and has prayed for accepting the present complaint. He has stressed on documents Ex C-1 and 6.

   12                                To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OP-1 argued that all the allegations of complainant are wrong and incorrect and asserted that complaint is an abuse to process of law and no cause of action arises against OP and even complainant is not their consumer. It is denied that book in question is purchased by complainant from him and averred that he is not authorised to sell school, college or academic books of any kind. OP-1 brought before the Forum that complainant is known to him and on 7.07.2016, he visited the shop of OP-1 and said that he wants to teach a lesson to OP-2 and 3 and asked him to give fake bill just to create evidence and jurisdiction and when OP-1 refused to do so and disclosed that he does not sell books and nor he is authorised to do so and so refused to issue bill. On this complainant showed his arrogance and misbehaved with him in the presence of Bhupinder Singh and Kuldeep Singh and even threatened to teach him a lesson. He has denied all the allegations and reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1. He has prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

   13                         Ld Counsel for OP-2 argued that there is never any misprinting in the books published by OP-2 as the Organization of OP-2 is committed to the systematic reform and continuous improvement in the quality of its products and it welcomes the suggestions which enable it to undertake further revision and refinement. It is averred that books of NCERT are available on their website ncert.nic.in and contents mentioned by complainant are a copy of textbook as well as copy on the NCERT website. No errors are found in their books. Moreover, complete book and its edition is not provided by complainant. It is further averred that book of complainant is the photocopy of published version of OP-1 and is not the version of OP-2 and complete comparison is required for both the books. It is further asserted that cost of their book is Rs.180/-and not 200/-and complainant should have taken the receipt for payment at the time of its purchase. Counsel for OP-2 alleged that they do not have any wholesale agent on their panel in Faridkot, Punjab and thus, OP-1 is not their empanelled wholesale agent. He has prayed for dismissal of complaint.

   14                           As OP-3 did not appear after filing reply and did not tender evidence and was proceeded against exparte. Thus, written statement filed by OP-3 is considered as part of arguments advanced. It is asserted that all the allegations levelled by complainant are wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-3. It is averred that books published by OP-2 and printed by OP-3 are the best for competitive exams and correct information is given in these books and no cause of action arises against OP-3. Moreover, OP-3 is not allowed to make any amendment or corrections in the slides provided by NCERT/OP-2 and upon close scrutiny of book of complainant, it is made out that book in question is not printed by answering OP and  there are no errors or misprints in the books printed by them. Complainant has purchased the said book from local vendor, who did not procure it from NCERT authorised wholesaler. Complainant has purchased pirated version of book, which was not printed by answering OP and moreover, there is no bill on record produced by complaint to prove that he purchased the said book. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP and prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

   15                                  From the careful perusal of case, evidence produced and parties and documents placed on record, it is observed that complainant purchased book of mathematics from OP-1, which contained errors and misprinting and despite request made by complainant to replace the said book, OP flatly refused to do so, which is deficiency in service on the part of OP-1. From the arguments and documents produced by OP-2 and 3, it is made out that books published and printed by OP-2 and 3 respectively are free from errors and have no misprinting. Plea of OP-1 that it does not sell academic books has no legs to stand upon as Photographs Ex C-4 to 6 produced by complainant on record make this point clear that OP-2 holds a proper book shop and deals in selling books. Another plea taken by OP-1 that complainant approached him for taking fake bill and he wanted to teach lesson to OP-2 and 3, also seems merits as there is no reason for a student of such a tender age to take revenge or to teach lesson to someone as in this age, students are concerned only with their study and they think only  about clearing the toughest exams by going through top class books. Thus, plea  taken by OP-1 holds no ground. Moreover, it is            common practice among shopkeepers in not issuing bill and this is also seen in present case. Also it is clear to every studious person that NCERT books are of    best standard for cracking the competitive exams and no one can doubt their printing or correction. Moreover, after careful perusal of books produced by OP-2, it is observed that books published by OP-2 are free from any error and also there is no misprinting. It seems that OP-1 is dealing in business of pirated books and sold the same to complainant under the garb of NCERT. Thus, it is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of OP-1.

   16                                     In the light of above discussion, this Forum is of considered opinion that complainant has succeeded in proving his case and therefore, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. OP-1 is restrained from dealing in pirated books and is advised to purchase and sell only books showing original patents or copy rights. OP-1 is further directed to pay Rs.5000/-to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides Rs.2000/-as litigation expenses. Complaint against OP-2 and 3 stands dismissed. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

   Announced in Open Forum

   Dated : 7.11.2016

                                        

   Member                         President

             (P Singla)                       (Ajit Aggarwal)

 

          Member                   President