Consumer court: Doctor sues printer for foiling charity bid

‘Printer’s handbill delay prevented holding of free medical camp’.


Our Correspondent August 17, 2013
The petitioner said that he had engaged Nadeem Printers to print handbills advertising the medical camp and had been promised that they would be ready in a few days. But on the stated date, the handbills were not ready and the printer asked for another day to complete the job, he said. The printer continued to delay the job and thus he was unable to set up the camp, Dr Akram said. PHOTO: FILE

LAHORE:


A printer has been sued for Rs100,000 for allegedly failing to publish handbills for a charity medical camp in time for it to operate during Ramazan.


Dr Bilal Akram, a private medical practitioner, submitted that he had planned to set up a camp offering checkups, ultrasounds and tests for diabetes and other diseases for free during Ramazan. He had also hired other doctors for the camp.

The petitioner said that he had engaged Nadeem Printers to print handbills advertising the medical camp and had been promised that they would be ready in a few days. But on the stated date, the handbills were not ready and the printer asked for another day to complete the job, he said. The printer continued to delay the job and thus he was unable to set up the camp, Dr Akram said.

He asked the court to direct Nadeem Printers to pay him Rs100,000 in damages for causing stress and to compensate for the payments he had made to other doctors. The court issued notice to the proprietor of Nadeem Printers for August 28.

The proprietor of Nadeem Printers was not available for comment.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 18th, 2013.

COMMENTS (2)

SHB | 8 years ago | Reply

Rs one lakh is peanut. He should go for ten or twenty million rupees for damages and loss of opportunity to serve the humanity.

JK | 8 years ago | Reply

Consumer courts are really working in this country,,Strange though

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

E-Publications

Most Read