BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.753 OF 2023 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.743 OF 2022, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-II, HYDERABAD Between:

McGraw Hill Education (India) Pvt.Ltd., Having its registered office at:

Anjana Complex, No.5/90A, Butt Road, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600016.

Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

.…Appellant/Opp.Party No.1 And

1. Kethavath Naresh, S/o.Teekya, Aged 23 years, Room No.54, E1 Hostel, OU Campus, Tarnaka, Hyderabad – 500007.

Mobile: 9010016745.

…..Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. Ebook Store RZB 1/71, New Roshan Pura, RZB1/71, New Roshan Pura Najaf Garh, Delhi – 110043.

Mobile: 9953898579.

…..Respondent No.2/Opp.Party No.2 Counsel for the Appellant/Opp.Party No.1 : M/s.Tara Sharma Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Complainant: Party-in-Person Counsel for the Respondent No.2/Opp.Party No.2: Notice served QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN…IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU, MEMBER-JUDICIAL FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble In-charge President)

1. This appeal is filed by the Complainant U/s.41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, praying this Commission to set aside the judgment dated 29.08.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, Hyderabad in CC.No.743/2022 without having the subject matter jurisdiction and in turn, not the competent Forum to adjudicate upon the issue in question; pass any such order or orders as this Commission may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The Appellant is the Opposite Party No.1, the Respondent No.1 is the Complainant and the Respondent No.2 is the Opposite Party No.2 in CC.No.743/2022.

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant purchased a book on 06.11.2022 having the title Indian Polity (M.Laxmikant) 6^th edition published by Mc Graw Hill Publications from Opposite Party No.2 through amazon e-commerce platform. A sum of Rs.1,294/- was paid for the product with free delivery for order Id: 407-2295100-9785915 and invoice No.IN-2775. The product was delivered on 09.11.2022.

4. It is submitted that after receiving the above said book, the Complainant searched for the price on the book. The invoice amount issued by Amazon showed that the price of the book as Rs.1,294/- but there was no MRP printed on the book. He made a call to Opposite Party No.1 office and came to know that the MRP of the book is Rs.995/-. He confirmed the same from the official website of Opposite Party No.1.

5. It is alleged that the seller Ebook store had collected Rs.299/- extra amount than the MRP fixed by the Opposite Party No.1. Not printing the price on the book can lead to abnormal pricing by the sellers which could lead students from rural areas and remote locations to pay price more than MRP. Thus the Complainant got cheated by the seller. Not printing the MRP on the book by Opposite Party No.1 amounts to deficiency of service under provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Hence, the complaint as prayed below:

“To direct the Opposite Party No.2 to restrain itself from exercising unfair trade practice in future and further direct Opposite Party No.1 to follow the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019; to direct the Opposite Parties to refund Rs.299/- collected more than that of MRP for the book; to direct the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, trauma and pain suffered; to impose a penalty of Rs.50,000/- on Opposite Party No.2 as punitive damages for resorting to unfair trade practice U/s.2(47) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and a penalty of Rs.25,000/- on Opposite Party No.1 for deficiency in service U/s.2(11) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019; further direct the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.25,000/- towards Consumer Welfare Fund.”

6. The Opposite Party No.1 filed