Haryana

StateCommission

RP/67/2016

ANUPAMA COLLEGE - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMIT AHLAWAT - Opp.Party(s)

M.S.YADAV

05 Sep 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                Revision Petition No.   67 of 2016

                                                Date of Institution:       04.08.2016

                                                Date of Decision:         05.09.2016

 

Anupama College of Engineering, Bhora Kalan, near Bilaspur Chowk, Pataudi Road, Delhi-Jaipur Road, NH No.8, Gurgaon-122413 through its Chairman D.K. Gupta.

Petitioner-Opposite Party No.2

 

 

Versus

 

1.      Amit Ahlawat son of Sh. Jai Pal Singh, resident of House no.44, Housing Board Colony, Kanheli Road, Rohtak.

 

Respondent-Complainant

2.      The Haryana State Counseling Society, Bays No.7-12, Sector 4, Panchkula through its Chairman.

Respondent-Opposite Party No.1

 

 

CORAM:   Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                   Mrs. Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.

      

 

Present:     Mr. M.S. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner

                    

O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIALMEMBER

 

The instant revision petition has been filed by Anupama College of Engineering-opposite party No.2 against the order dated 06.05.2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby objections filed by the petitioner in execution were dismissed.

2.      Amit Ahlawat-complainant filed complaint before the District Forum with the averments that he took admission in the college of petitioner and deposited Rs.54,000/-.  Thereafter, the complainant on the basis of rank in AIEEE, 2008 got admission in Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak.  The complainant did not attend even a single class in the institute of petitioner.  The complainant requested the petitioner to refund the amount paid but to no avail.

3.      The petitioner was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum.

4.      The District Forum vide order dated 27.05.2009 allowed the complaint by directing the petitioner, who was opposite party No.2 in the complaint to refund Rs.53000/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till its payment to the complainant.  The opposite parties were also directed to return all the original documents submitted by the complainant at the time of admission.

5.      The petitioner did not challenge the aforesaid order of the District Forum. 

6.      The complainant filed execution application before the District Forum. 

7.      The petitioner appeared and filed objections before the District Forum interalia stating that college was closed on account of withdrawal of permission by AICTE or non extension of approval.  The District Forum dismissed the objections vide impugned order.

8.      Against the aforesaid order, the petitioner filed the present revision petition.

9.      It is not in dispute that the order dated 27.05.2009 passed by the District Forum has not been challenged till date by the petitioner and has attained finality.  That being the position, the District Forum rightly dismissed the objections in the execution application.  There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. Thus, the revision petition is dismissed.  

 

Announced 05.09.2016

(Urvashi Agnihotri) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member