This is a complaint made by one Sukhamay Bhattacharya of 15/6 Purbachal Main Road, Kolkata-78, against (a) Sankar Jana, Publisher and Editor of M/s Bengal Creative Corporation, Book Publication and Media House, Bhawanipur, Kolkata-700 025, OP No.1, (b) Anup Kumr Datta, New Jadavpur Art Press, 84/B Ibrahimpur Road, P.S.-Jadavpur, Kolkata – 32 – OP No.2 and (c) Arjun Goswami, Editor/Publisher, Knowledge Publishing House, 2/73, Viveknagar, Jadavpur, Kolkata – 75, OP No.3, praying for an order to refund the deposited amount of Rs.64,240/- to the Complainant and also an order to repay the total cost paid by the Complainant for DTP printing of Rs.23,240/- and for an order of 30% royalty on Rs.49,360/-, an order for O.D Interest @ 10.50 on Rs.64,240/- for 15 months and compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-, an order for issuing editing certificate and for an order for reprinting and binding of 120 books   named in a style Evolution of Human Beings and Society.

            Facts in brief are that the Complainant came into contact with one Samarendra Dutta who assured him for solving all the problems. The same Samarendra Dutta has assured him the publication of the books and introduced with an agent named Sankar Mandal who introduced him to OP No.1. Thereafter, Complainant has stated that he has established one NGO Purbachal Senior Citizens Society’for arranging Bridhyashram. Complainant for making his book strong wrote a letter on 4.4.2014 to Bengal Creative Corporation for drafting an agreement of 100 copies of books. OP No.1 sent an e-mail on 13.10.2014 which delayed the publication. Thereafter, Complainant sent another letter as per advice of Advocate Samarendra Datta and OP No.1 who assured the publication. Complainant issued one advance cheque for Rs.1,000/- from his O.D.A/c for proof reading. Thereafter, Complainant sent a stop letter to the Bank. Subsequently, Complainant came in contact with OP No.2 who assured to publish all the books as per his instruction. Finally, Complainant came into contact with OP No.3. But, anyhow all the OPs did not complete the work of the Complainant entrusted to them. So, Complainant was compelled to file this Complaint.

            OP No.1 filed written version and denied all the allegations made out in the complaint. This OP has denied that Complainant paid any money to him. Further, this OP has challenged the jurisdiction of this Forum and also challenged the maintainability of this case. This OP has also stated that the Complainant violated all the provisions of monopoly and restrictive trade practice act 1969, Indian Contract Act, 1872, sale of goods act,1930. It is also denied that Complainant is entitled to any relief from this OP and he has prayed for dismissal of this complaint. OP No.2 has filed an additional written version wherein OP No.2 has stated that Complainant has given an order to this OP for printing books at the cost of Rs.6,000/- Complainant paid Rs.1,000/- and also paid Rs.5,000/- by cheque. But, this cheque of Rs5,000/- was dishonoured. Complainant is a fraud. The Complainant is guilty for non-payment of Rs.5,000/-. Complainant practised fraud upon OP No.2 and flouted the terms of agreement. So, this OP has prayed for dismissal of this complaint with cost of Rs.10,000/-.

         OP No.2 prior to submitting additional written version has submitted written version where has denied the allegation of the complainant and as prayed for dismissal of this complaint.

Decision with reasons

       Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned  in the complaint petition OP No.1 filed questionnaire against the affidavit-in-chief of the Complainant to which Complainant replied. Thereafter, OP No.1 filed evidence against which Complainant put questionnaire. Thereafter, OP No.1 filed written argument and the case was heard their Ld. Advocates for both the sides.

            Main points for determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs prayed for.

          On perusal of the prayer portion of the complaint petition, it appears that  Complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.64,240/- and cost of Rs.23,240/-. Complainant has filed certain documents. On perusal of which it appears that those are correspondences made by Complainant with the OPs. There is no document filed on behalf of the Complainant to establish that he paid Rs.64,240/-, there Xerox copies of bill, cash memo are filed which reveals that Rs.13,414/-, Rs.20,000/- and Rs.10,000/- bills were issued. However, these bills did not make it clear as to whether Sukhamoy Bhattacharya made payment of these amounts and those are receipt to that effect. Three cheque numbers are mentioned of those bills as cheque No.871605, SBI and cheque No.871606 and cheque No.871607. If at all it is applied that by those cheques payment were made, there is nothing to substantiate that Complainant paid Rs.64,240/- of which refund he has sought and in such circumstances the claim of the Complainant cannot be accepted as guarantee.

            Secondly, Complainant has prayed for an order to repay the total cost paid by the Complainant for DTP printing i.e. to the tune of Rs.23,240/-. The question is that Complainant has not filed any document to establish that he paid this amount for printing to any publisher. Accordingly, this prayer cannot be granted.

          Other prayer is claim of 30% royalty on Rs.49,360/-. In our view this Forum does not have jurisdiction to award royalty to the Complainant. if it is assumed that Complainant royalty as per his suffering of loss due to non publication, we are afraid that it is covered under the Consumer Protection Act.

            However, Complainant has sought for interest @10.50% on Rs.64,240/- for 15 months. Since Complainant failed to establish that he made the payment to the tune of Rs.64,240/- he is not entitled to any interest there upon.

        Complainant has also prayed for Rs.1,00,000/- for his mental agony and loss of reputation. In this regard, it appears that Complainant has not made out the case that he suffered due to the conduct of the OP. The mental agony and loss of reputation that he cannot  be awarded Rs.1,00,000/- and also Rs.15,000/- per month till final settlement. Further, Complainant has sought for an order for giving editing certificate for the editing done by OP No.1. In our view issuance of such certificate is not covered under the Consumer Protection Act. Further, Complainant has prayed for compensation an order for reprinting and binding of 120 books by Anup Kr. Dutta, New Jadavpur Art Press, failing which compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Complainant fails to produce any evidence in this regard and so this prayer cannot be allowed.

            In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is clear that Complainant failed to prove his allegation made out in the complaint.

            Hence,

ordered

              RBT/CC/49/2016 and the same is dismissed on contest.