DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 736 of 2010 Date of Inst: 12.11.2010 Date of Decision:23.02.2011 Rashim Sharma daughter of Sh.Ashwani Kumar r/o House No.1091, Sector 18-C, Chandigarh. ---Complainant V E R S U S Baba Deep Singh Ji, Multispecialty Institute, Quite Office 3, First Floor, Sector 35-A, Chandigarh through its Proprietor. ---Opposite Party QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: Sh.Rohit Mahajan, Adv. for complainant OP exparte. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Ms.Rashim Sharma has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OPs be directed to :- i) refund a sum of Rs.15,000/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. ii) Pay Rs.5 lacs/- as compensation for harassment and mental tension. iii) Pay Rs.5500/- as costs of litigation. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that OP is an institute which provide services to the students for getting admission in the school/colleges affiliated to different boards. According to the complainant, in September, 2009 she availed the services of OP for getting admission in 10+2 class in an affiliated school of CBSE. She deposited a sum of Rs.5000/- against receipt No.60 dated 14.09.2009 and another sum of Rs.10,000/- in cash for which no receipt was issued by OP. According to the complainant, she was assured by OP that she would be informed about the classes, date sheet, roll no. and exams later on. It has been pleaded by the complainant that when no information was received she visited the office of OPs but OP postponed the matter on one pretext or the other. It has further been pleaded by the complainant that in March 2010 the session was over but she did not get admission in any school. Ultimately, she demanded refund of Rs.15000/- which has not been refunded despite her repeated requests and visits which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. OP was duly served but nobody appeared on its behalf either in person or through counsel. Therefore, it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 27.01.2011. 4. The averments made in the complaint as reproduced above in para No.2 of the order stands corroborated from the affidavit of the complainant as well as from Annexure C-1 i.e. the copy of the receipt issued by the OP. From the perusal of Annexure C-1, it is proved that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.5000/- to OP for availing its services. The complainant has specifically stated in his affidavit that she deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- with OP but no receipt was issued to her despite repeated requests. Otherwise also, the averments made in the complaint have gone un-rebutted and un-controverted as nobody appeared on behalf of OP despite due service to deny the allegations levelled in the complaint. That being so, the complainant merits success. 5. In view of the above findings, this complaint is allowed with a direction to OP to refund the amount of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant. OP is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides Rs.7,000/- as costs of litigation. 6. This order be complied with by OP within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which OP shall be liable to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18% p.a. from date of filing of the complaint till its realization besides costs of litigation. 7. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 23.02.2011 Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
