Before the District Forum:Kurnool
Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
And
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B.Com., LL.B., Member
Friday the 19th day of December,2003
C.D.No.126/2003
V.Manohar Babu,
S/o Venaiah,
R/o Rakkasila Village,
Alampur Mandal,
Mahaboob Nagar District. . . . Complainant represented by his counsel
Sri.B.Nagalakshmi Reddy, Advocate
-Vs-
B.Raja Rajeswara Reddy,
Director, Nalanda (NOS) College,
Coaching Institure for NOS Courses,
D.No.40-447/18,
Gipson Colony,
Opp. STBC College,
Kurnool. . . . Opposite party
O R D E R
1. This consumer dispute case of the complainant is filed under section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 seeking a direction on the opposite party to refund to the complainant the amount of Rs.12,000/- with interest and also compensation for deficiency of service for the metal agony suffered by the complainant at the conduct of the opposite party.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case are that the complainant while working as Teacher at Santhi Nagar of Mahaboob Nagar District joined the College of the opposite party as student for the course of B.A., English and paid Rs.2,000/- towards the admission fee on 11-06-2002 and obtained receipt bearing No.231. He also paid Rs.10,000/- in three installments to the opposite party towards the tuition fee and obtained receipt. The opposite party also collected the original of the S.S.C, Intermediate and the Degree Provisional Certificate of the complainant under the acknowledgement endorsement, but the opposite party did not conduct any tuition and did not give any coaching for the said course to the complainant for the preparation of the Examination. In the Hall Ticker issued to the complainant the photo of the complainant was not affixed, the signature of the complainant was not there nor the signature of the controller of the Examination was there. Even though the complainant wrote Examination at Basavrama Tharakam Memorial Law College, Cuddapah even till today the marks memorandum was not send to him. Except an information for the opposite party as to his fail in some subjects. Hence the complainant paid Examination fee to the opposite party for the purpose of appearing for the failed subjects. As a telegram was received on 17-02-2002 as to the commencement of Degree Examination from 14-02-2003 itself he could not appear for the said Examination. The said Telegram was booked by the opposite party on 13-02-2003 at Kurnool and it reached him without leaving any sufficient time. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party in furnishing necessary information well in advance. As he could not appear for the Examinations the complainant lost the increments in his salary as Teacher and he lost the promotion chances also. Being aggrieved by the deficient conduct of the opposite party the complainant caused a legal notice dated 09-06-2003 and it was received by the opposite party on 14-06-2003, but there is neither any compliance of the demand made therein by the opposite party nor any reply of the respondent.
3. In pursuance of the notice of this Forum as to this case even though the opposite party got his appearance through an advocate on 07-10-2003, but failed to a pear thereafter and file any written version, documents and any sworn affidavit disputing the complainant’s cause of action and his liability for the claim made by the complainant and ultimately the opposite party obtained the proceedings and remained exparte.
4. Hence, the point for consideration is whether the complainant has made out his case and his entitleness for the reliefs sought against the opposite party?
5. The complainant besides relying upon the documentary record in Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 relies upon his sworn affidavit which reiterates the case of the complainant.
6. The Ex.A1 the receipt No.231 dated 11-06-2002 envisages the receipt of Rs.2,000/- on 11-06-2002 from the complainant towards the admission fee. The said Ex.A1 was issued by the Authorized Signatory of Sri Sarada Institute of Higher Education Intex Soft Computes, Gipson Colony, Kurnool. The address on the said receipt co-relates to the address of the opposite party. The amount in Ex.A1 was said to have been paid by the complainant towards the Admission Fee while the complainant joined the College of the opposite party for the course of B.A., English they said fact averred by the complainant both in the complaint averments and the sworn affidavit averments was not rebutted by the opposite party to doubt its bonafidies.
7. The Ex.A2 bunch of three receipts envisages the receipt of Rs.5,000/-, Rs.2,000/- and Rs.3,000/- on 07-05-2001, 18-10-2001 and 10-11-2001 towards the tuition fee from the complainant by the college to which the opposite party is the Director. The fact envisaged in the Ex.A2 and averred both in the complaint averments and sworn affidavit of the complainant was not rebutted or disputed by the opposite party by any contest to doubt their bonafidies.
8. The Ex.A3 Hall Ticket said to have been issued by controller of Examination of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University to the complainant with the Register No.R204582 for appearing the B.A. Degree Examination at Basavarama Tharakam Memorial Law College at Cuddapah does neither bear the signature of the candidate nor the controller of the Examinations nor any photograph of the candidate as complained by the complainant in the averments of his complaint. In the absence of any rebuttal of the said contentions relating to the Ex.A3 from the opposite party there appears no material to doubt the bonafidies of the complaint allegations as to the Ex.A3.
9. The Ex.A4 dated 23-10-2002 envisages the receipt of S.S.C., Inter and Degree Provisional Certificates mentioned therein by the opposite party and taking the responsibility for them. In the absence of any rebuttal from the opposite party there appears no material to doubt the bonafidies.
10. The Ex.A5 is the ad issued by the opposite party as to the prospectus of the one year degree and the P.G. 1st year Inter and direct appearance for the 10th Class etc., there appears no material to doubt the bonafidies of Ex.A5 in the absence of the rebuttal from the opposite party.
11. The Ex.A6 is the copy of the Telegram booked on the 13th February, 2003 at 15:29 hours to the complainant informing the commencement of the Degree Examination on 14th February. The complaint averments sworn affidavit averments and the averments of the legal notice dated 09-06-2003 in the Ex.A7 allege they said Telegram was given by the opposite party. In the absence of any rebuttal from the opposite party’s side there appears no material to doubt the bonafidies of Ex.A6 and the allegations of the complainant as the Ex.A6.
12. As the above said un rebutted material in Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 of the complainant’s side as is corroborating the complainant case and the cause of action against the opposite party and the deficient conduct of the opposite party in responding to the service obligations which the opposite party owes to the complainant on account of its privy with the complainant as envisaged in supra stated un rebutted documentary record.
13. Therefore, in the result of the above discussion there being every bonafidies in the claim of the complainant arising out of the deficient conduct of the service of the opposite party the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to refund Rs.12,000/- to the complainant with interest at 12% per annum from 10-11-2001 and Rs.500/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as costs. The opposite party is to comply with the order of this case within a month of the receipt of the order failing which the opposite party shall be liable to make good of the awarded amount with 16% interest from the date of the default till realization.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictation corrected by us, Pronounced in the open Court, this 19th day of December 2003.
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite party:- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Receipt No.231 dated 11-06-2002 issued by Sri.saradha Institute of Higher Education, Kurnool for Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.
Ex.A2 Three Receipts (1) Dated 07-05-2002 for Rs.5,000/-. (2) Dated 18-10-2001 for Rs.2,000/-. (3) Dated 10-11-2001 for Rs.3,000/- issued by Nalenda College to the complainant.
Ex.A3 Hall Ticket issued by the Manonmanlam Sundaranar University to the complainant.
EX.A4 Endorsement dated 23-10-2002 Nalanda College, Kurnool as to the receipt of the Original Certificates as the complainant.
Ex.A5 Broacher issued by the Nalanda College, Kurnool.
Ex.A6 Telegram dated 13-02-2003 booked by opposite party.
Ex.A7 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 09-06-2003 issued by complainants counsel to opposite party (along with Postal acknowledgement of opposite party as to the receipt of the said Legal Notice).
List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:- Nill
MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
