State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Bal Krishan Sharma Son Of Shri Madho Ram, ... vs 1. Kamla David Singh Wife Of Shri David ... on 9 February, 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA First Appeal No.1021 of 2007 Date of Institution: 24.04.2007 Date of Decision: 09.02.2012 Bal Krishan Sharma son of Shri Madho Ram, Resident of House No.1113, Tehan Street, Devi Bhawan Bazar, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar. Appellant (Complainant) Versus 1. Kamla David Singh wife of Shri David Singh, resident of St. Thomas School, Jagadhri. 2. Shoshan wife of Robin, Clerk in St. Thomas School, Jagadhri. 3. Management St. Thomas School, Jagadhri, through its Chairman. Respondents (Ops) BEFORE: Honble Mr. Justice R.S. Madan, President. Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member. For the Parties: Shri Rajesh Sheoran, Advocate for appellant. Shri Manbir Singh Rathi, Advocate for respondents. O R D E R
Justice R.S. Madan, President:
Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 29.03.2007 passed by District Consumer Forum, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri whereby the complaint bearing No.440/2006 filed by complainant (appellant) was dismissed.
The case of the complainant before the District Consumer Forum was that he had purchased a book of Active English of 5th Class for his son Kunal Sharma, who was studying in St. Thomas School, Jagadhri. The grievance of the complainant before the District Consumer Forum was that the opposite parties charged Rs.86/- against the actual price of Rs.75/- by affixing sticker on it. Complainant further stated that the book sold to him was a Specimen book which could not be sold. Thus, the complainant alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the respondents-opposite parties and filed complaint.
Opposite Parties while contesting the complaint took the plea that the school authorities had purchased the aforesaid mentioned books from Royal Book Centre @ Rs.86/- vide bill No.05 dated 9.3.2006 and the same were supplied to the students on no loss no profit against payment of Rs.86/- per book. It was further stated that the complainant was never supplied the specimen book, as alleged.
District Consumer Forum while disposing of the complaint observed that the complainant was having grudge against the respondents-opposite parties, being a teacher in the same school. He had made several complaints against the school authorities and having remained un-successful in his target, this false complaint was filed by him.
Aggrieved against the dismissal of his complaint, the complainant has filed the instant appeal.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the case file, we do not find any infirmity in the well reasoned order passed by District Consumer Forum. Opposite Parties have tendered in evidence the bill No.05 dated 9.3.2006 for Rs.9030/- whereby it has been established on the record that the books were purchased by them @ Rs.86/- per book from Royal Book Centre. Even otherwise it is well settled law that there is no restriction on the publisher to increase the price of the book by pasting sticker on the original printed price. Reference in this regard is made to the judgment rendered by Honble National Commission in Pustak Mahal versus Rattan Lal Premi, 2004(3) CLT 643 wherein it has been held that:-
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1) - Unfair trade practice Book price Increased by pasting sticker by publisher on the original printed price No question of misleading the public concerning the price at which the books are to be sold There is no restriction on the publisher to increase the price of the book Both the parties knew the price being charged Held that there is no question of any unfair trade practice.
In para 8 of Rattan Lal Premis case it has been held that:-
..There is no restriction on the publisher to increase the price of the book. Both the parties knew the price being charged, there were no misrepresentation or misleading factors are involved and since it was an agreed and voluntary contract, there is no question of any unfair trade practice.
In the instant case the respondents-opposite parties have produced the bills Annexure-A, Annexure-B and Annexure-C that the books were purchased by them from the Publisher/agency @ Rs.86/- per book. Therefore, in view of the observation made by Honble National Commission in Rattan Lal Premis case (Supra), it cannot be said that the use of sticker showing the rate of book @ Rs.86/- per book, was any kind of unfair trade price.
The opposite parties supplied the books to their students including the complainant on the basis of No loss no profit. Though the complainant had produced the specimen copy of the book before the District Forum, but it cannot be said that the said book was supplied by the opposite parties to he complainant. Undisputedly, the complainant was/is a teacher of Physical Education in St.Thomas School, Jagadhri. It has also come on the record that the complainant had made several complaints against the respondents-opposite parties. Thus, the complainant has miserably failed to establish his case on the record against the respondents-opposite parties.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, we hardly find any ground to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the District Consumer Forum.
Hence, finding no merit in this appeal, it is dismissed.
Announced: Justice R.S. Madan 09.02.2012 President B.M. Bedi Judicial Member