H.Panigrahi, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against an Order dated 2.9.93 passed in CDF Case No. 1654 of 1993 by the Calcutta District Consumer Redressal Form, Alipore asking the petitioners for issuance of certificate of fitness on the cassettes deposited by the respondent no. 2 after observing necessary formalities and to pay compensasion of Rs. 15,000/-. The petitioner no. 1 is a registered society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 whose primary function is to espouse and spread the cause of education in the country. Prior to 11.9.93 the Visva Bharati (Society) Music Board was engaged itself to preserve, protect and improvise the musical legendary work of Rabindra Nath Tagore. But by virtu of the amendment of the Visva Bharati Act, 1951, Visva Bharatl Music Board was amalgamated with the 'Visva Bharati' and all properties including assets, rights and liabilities became vested in the petitioner no. 1. The petitioner no. 2 who is a Joint Director (Sales) looking after the Granthana Vibhaga of the Visava Bharati. The copyright in the Musical works of Rabindra Nath Tagore has vested with the petitioners. The respondent no. 2 who claims a registered publisher for production of audio cassette communicated in a letter to the petitioners that she desired to publish a cassette of Rabindra Sangit (songs) sung by respondent No. 1 and wanted to obtain certificate of fitness from V.B.S.B. Authority. Pursuant to the said letter the petitioner no. 2 asked the respondent no. 1 through the letter dated 11.11.92 to send the cassette in duplicate containing 12 selected songs of Rabindra Nath Tagore along with Rs. 120/- for the purpose of tune examination fee. The text of the letter sent by petitioner no. 2 is quoted hereunder :- "Re: Permission for recording Rabindranath Tagore's songs. This has reference to your letter dated 9.11.92. You have our permission to record 12 songs, as per list submitted by you, on the following terms and conditions : (1) You will pay an advance royalty of 5% on printed price of the cassette. (2) The following payment of royalty is to be made within the following year, i.e. on the month of April along with a statement of sale. (3) You will also be required to send us cassette in duplicate containing the above songs for our approval before it is marketed along with approval fee of Rs. 120/- for cassette. (4) The label design of the cassette should inscribe the words Approved by the Visya Bharati Music Board or Visya Bharati Sangeet Samiti Anumodita. (5) You will have to send us 12 complimentary copies of the cassette. You are requested to send us the cassettes containing the above songs for our approval. Thanking you,". The respondent no. 2 as per the instruction of V. B. S. B. paid Rs. 120/- along with it submitted two identical cassettes (each containing the said 12 songs) through the letter dated 23.11.92. After examining those songs the petitioner no. 2 communicated through the letter dated 28.12.92 to the respondent no. 2 asking her to re-take the songs and thereafter send the same to the Board for approval. The cassettes were carefully examined by an expert member Sri Subhas Choudhury who made certain remarks on the cassettes allegedly showing certain mistakes in intonation an also notations of "Swarabitan". It was further indicated that the cassettes contained several mistakes in pronunciation, voices throbbing expression and disrupted voice. The respondent no. 2 in her letter dated 23.2.93 addressed to the petitioner no. 2 however, emphasised that there were no mistakes in the recitation by the respondent no. 1. The words "Rini Rini" were allegedly uttered in place of "Rune Rune". The respondent no. 2 however, sent two 're-taken' cassettes of the said 12 songs together with a fees of Rs. 120/- towards tune examination. After receipt of those cassettes the petitioners claimed to have placed before the Board for giving final approval which awaits result and no immediate action could be taken due to the pendency of the consumer dispute.
(2.) The respondent no. 1 who was, eventually, the complainant before the District Consumer Redressal Forum without awaiting the results of the Board hurriedly filed a consumer dispute. It is claimed by the petitioner no. 1 that the Visva Bharati Authority had not been impleaded as a party before the District consumers Redresal Forum but the complainant somehow to take an order only impleaded respondent no. 1 giving improper description of the petitioner no.2. Though the petitioner no. 2 filed a showcause before the District Forum but the latter without properly considering the same passed the impugned order.
(3.) The respondent no. 1 inter alia, challenged the arbitrary, whimsical and complacent attitude of the petitioners before the Consumers' Redressal Forum claiming Rs. 70,000/- as compensation. It is further stated that the petitioner no. 2 being a statutory body, it was not expected of them to behave in such a slip-shod manner. It is claimed that the Consumer Forum after a careful consideration of her claim awarded damage Rs. 15,000/- as compensation, over and above the direction to the petitioners for issuing proper fitness certificate within 10 days after observance of necessary formalities.;