Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/681/2015

Mandeep Singh Gill - Complainant(s)

Versus

Allen Career Institute - Opp.Party(s)

Ravi Kumar Adv.

29 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	681 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	01.12.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	29.01.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Mandeep Singh Gill, 237, First Floor, Sector 78, Mohali.

 

             …..Complainant

Versus

 

1]  Allen Career Institute through Sh.Pushkar Rai, Centre Head, SCO 354-355, Ground Floor, Sector 34, Chandigarh.

 

2]  Sh.Pushkar Rai, SCO 354-355, First Floor, Sector 34, Chandigarh.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Complainant in person.

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     OPs exparte.

 

 

PER JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant got his son Manjot Gill admitted with Opposite Party No.1 for Nurture Course-Phase-I for IIT-JEE Mains & Advanced Course in April, 2015, after matriculation and paid fee of Rs.1,07,000/- for full one year against receipt dated 2.4.2015 Ann.C-1. In the meantime, the son of the complainant got selected by Indo Swiss Training Centre under CSIO vide Call Letter dated 15.7.2015 (Ann.C-2).  Accordingly, the complainant informed Opposite Party No.1 about the selection of his son on 31.7.2015.  Thereafter, he submitted his son’s Identity Card, Attendance Card, Original Fee Receipt along with refund form and application dated 20.8.21015 (Ann.A-3), which was acknowledged vide Ann.C-3A.  That as per the acknowledgement, the refund amount was to be transferred to the bank account as per the RTGS within 7 days from the receipt of application form, but the same was not done by the OPs.  As such, reminder were sent to them vide Ann.C-4 & C-5 and thereafter approached through Consumer Association Chandigarh, but ultimately Opposite Party No.2 has refused to entertain the complainant’s claim vide letter dated 24.10.2015.  It is pleaded that the rule quoted by Opposite Party No.2 is not applicable to the complainant as it relates to only those students who have already passed XII and are undergoing coaching for entrance tests for seeking admission to MBBS/BDS/B.Tech Courses etc., whereas the son of the complainant was studying in Class XI.  Hence, alleging the said act of the OPs as illegal and deficiency in service, this complaint has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Parties NO.1 & 2 though being duly served through registered post-dated 07.12.2015, failed to put in appearance on 08.01.2016, thus raising presumption under Sub-clause (2) of Regulation 10 of The Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, they were proceeded exparte vide order dated 08.01.2016.

 

3]       Complainant led evidence in support of her contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the complainant in person and have also perused the record.

 

5]       The complainant had got his minor son admitted to a preparatory course namely Nurture Course Phase-I, after his matriculation examination and while was still in his 11^th standard.  The complainant paid a total of Rs.1,07,000/- as full fee for Course Phase-I vide cheque No.481522, dated 2.4.2015 drawn on Punjab & Sind Bank, as per Ann.C-1.  However, the complainant’s son got selected by Indo Swiss Training Centre under Central Scientific Industrial Organization (CSIO), Chandigarh, on the basis of ISTC Entrance Examination held on 12.7.2015, after counselling session, dated 15.7.2015.

 

6]       The complainant preferred the refund of the course fee by submitting Identity Card, Attendance Card and Original Fee Receipts, with the Opposite Party along with an application dated 20.8.2015.  However, the complainant is aggrieved due to the non-refund of fee of Rs.1,07,000/- by the Opposite Parties citing some Clause of terms & conditions of admission form, which according to the complainant is not applicable to his case, thus claiming deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party has sought the refund of his fee amounting to Rs.1,07,000/- from the Opposite Parties.

 

7]       The Opposite Parties were duly served through registered notice dated 7.12.2015.  However, in the absence of any report after lapse of 30 days, a presumption was drawn under Sub Clause (2) of Regulation 10 of The Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, and the OPs were proceeded against exparte vide order of this Forum dated 08.01.2016. 

 

8]       Though the Opposite Parties were given an opportunity to contest the claim of the complainant, however, as they have preferred to no come present and filed their written reply/version, explaining there side of the story, we are left with no alternative, but to believe the averments of the complainant, which are duly supported by a sworn affidavit of the complainant.  Therefore, in the absence of any defence from the side of the Opposite Parties all the averments of the complaint, go unrebutted against them.  As the Opposite Parties certainly had a policy of refund of fee, which was duly put into action by the complainant by his letter dated 20.8.2015, but the refusal on the part of the Opposite Parties to refund the amount citing such a clause, which was not applicable to the complainant, certainly amounts to deficiency in service on their part.  Therefore, in these terms, the present complaint deserves to succeed against them.

 

9]       In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite parties are found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainant is allowed against the Opposite Parties. The Opposite parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

[a] To refund the fee of Rs.1,07,000/- to the complainant, after making deduction of proportionate fee for three months, along with interest @9% p.a. w.e.f. 20.8.2015 i.e. the date of seeking refund (Ann.C-3 & 3/A) till its realization.

 

[b] To pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant as consolidated amount of compensation for causing mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service;

 

[c] To pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.7,000/-

 

         The above said order shall be complied within 45 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties jointly & severally; thereafter, they shall be liable to pay an interest @18% per annum on the amount mentioned in sub-para [a] w.e.f. 20.8.2015 i.e. the date of seeking refund (Ann.C-3 & 3/A) till its realization and also on the amount as mentioned in sub-para [b] above from the date of filing this complaint till it is paid, apart from paying litigation expenses.

 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

 

Announced

29^th January, 2016

                                                                        Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

Om                                                                                                                       

 

 

DISTRICT FORUM – II

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.681 OF 2015

PRESENT:   None   Dated the 29th day of January, 2016

O R D E R                        Vide our detailed order of even date, recorded separately, the complaint has been allowed against  Opposite Parties                    After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

 

(Priti Malhotra)	(Rajan Dewan)	(Jaswinder Singh Sidhu)
Member	President	Member