Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/1367/2017

Prabhat Saxena s/o D.S.Saxena - Complainant(s)

Versus

Allean Carrier Institute - Opp.Party(s)

Ramchandar Sharma

12 Mar 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 1311/ 2017

 

Allen Career Institute, Samachar Jagat Bhawan, Opp. Vidyasharam School, Near Dainik Bhaskar, JLN Marg, Jaipur & ors.

Vs.

Prabhat Saxena s/o D.S.Saxena r/o 25/4 Kaveri Path, Mansarowar.

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 1367/2017

 

Prabhat Saxena s/o D.S.Saxena r/o 25/4 Kaveri Path, Mansarowar.

Vs.

Allen Career Institute, Samachar Jagat Bhawan, Opp. Vidyasharam School, Near Dainik Bhaskar, JLN Marg, Jaipur & ors.

Date of Order 12.3.2018

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

2

 

Mr.Narendra Shandilya counsel for Allen Career Institute

Mr.R.C.Sharma counsel for the complainant Prabhat Saxena

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

 

Both appeals are filed against the single order hence are decided by this common order.

 

The contention of the Allen Institute is that consumer never applied for refund in proper format hence, the claim should have been dismissed.

 

Per contra the contention of the consumer is that he applied through e-mail which was declined by the institute. The Forum below has allowed the claim but a rider has been put to apply in one month in given proforma which should have been set aside.

 

Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment .

 

3

 

There is no dispute about the fact that daughter of the complainant took admission with the institute in Pre-medical Nurture course phase I and on 2.4.2014 Rs. 75,000/- were paid as fees. As the daughter of the complainant suffered from depression he asked for refund of the fee by e-mail dated 28.5.2014 which was declined by the institute.

 

The contention of the institute is that in proper format the application was not submitted. During course of arguments reply to the e-mail dated 28.5.2014 is submitted which speaks that as per refund rules the complainant is not eligible for refund but in this reply it has not been intimated to the consumer that the application should be made in a particular format.

 

During course of arguments the counsel for the institute has submitted that refund application form could be obtained from the office and it is only off line whereas in refund rules it has been narrated that refund application form could be obtained from the website.

 

The counsel for the consumer has particularly contended

4

 

that no application form is available on website and inspite of the order of the Forum below the institute is not ready to give prescribed refund application form.

 

It has also been disputed that the daughter of the consumer has not gone in depression but this cannot be a issue here to decide. In any case it is not in dispute that the consumer asked for refund on 28.5.2014 which was declined by the institute without any reason.

 

It has also not been disputed that the daughter of the consumer was not attending the classes since 15.4.2014 hence, she was eligible for refund but only for technical reason the refund has not been made that the application has not been submitted in prescribed form whereas it is more than clear that prescribed application form is not available on website and rightly been contended by the counsel for the consumer that institution is not providing the prescribed form.

 

Hence, there is no merit in the appeal filed by the institution and liable to be rejected . Further more it has been concluded that consumer is entitled for the refund hence,

5

 

appeal of the consumer is allowed and condition imposed by the Forum below for applying in prescribed form in one month is set aside. Rest of the order of the Forum below is confirmed with the direction that order of refund of fee be complied within one month from today otherwise it will carry interest as ordered by the Forum below.

 

(Nisha Gupta) President

nm