<br /> COMPLAINT FILED: 26.11.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 04th FEBRUARY 2009<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2557/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Mangala T Muddodi,D/o Thimmappa N. Muddodi,1 A, Chowdeshwari Prasanna,17th Main, 9th Cross,Muneshwara Block,Bangalore – 26.V/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. Balakrishna Maddodi (Associate Dean)Aakson Group of Institutions,# 14, KHB Main Road,Kanaka Nagar, Near Kaveri Nagar, R.T Nagar P.OBangalore – 32.2. Director,Aakson Group of Institutions,# 14, KHB Main Road,Kanaka Nagar, Near Kaveri Nagar, R.T Nagar P.OBangalore – 32.3. Chairman,Aakson Group of Institutions,# 14, KHB Main Road,Kanaka Nagar, Near Kaveri Nagar, R.T Nagar P.OBangalore – 32.Advocate – Sri.M.I.Khatib<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund Rs.25,000/- and pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> Complainant after completing her B.Com thought of joining MBA course at OP 2 - 3 institutions wherein OP.1 her cousin is acting as Associate Dean. She intended to join the said course for the academic year 2008. When she contacted the OP they asked her to pay Rs.25,000/- towards the admission and tuition fee for the first semester. She paid the said amount but thereafter some how the course was not started. Earlier it was intimated to her that the said batch consists of 30 students, 28 students are already enrolled only two seats are vacant. But it was not the true fact, only herself and her friend who joined the said course. Then she immediately approached the OP either to start the course or refund her amount but all her efforts went in futile. The repeated requests and demands made by her went vain. Under such circumstances she felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Though she had paid the lump sum amount OP didn’t impart the education as promised. Hence she is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs.<br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to OP complainant was admitted provisionally for the said course subject to her eligibility. She was asked to produce the marks card of B.com degree but she failed to do so. Thereafter OP came to know that she has not cleared the B.Com, she is yet to pass one subject in third B.com. In the mean time she herself withdraw from the said course. She was not regular in attending the classes, though OP commenced the training. Due to the untimely withdrawal of the complainant, OP sustained the loss which they have paid to the university for her registration of the MBA course. Complainant is aware of the fact that the fees once paid is not refundable. On 10.03.2008 she wrote a letter to OP expressing her inability to continue the course. Under such circumstances complainant can’t allege the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. OP institution is ready to defer her admission and to re-enroll for the said course soon after she became eligible but complainant herself is at her fault. Hence relief sought is premature. Complaint is devoid of merits. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed her affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has Proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of <br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <br /> entitled for the relief’s now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative<br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative in part<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant took a MBA seat at OP institution on 25.09.2007 by paying Rs.25,000/-. It is the case of the complainant that after completing her B.com examination she thought of doing MBA course that is why she approached the OP. It is further alleged by the complainant that after the receipt of admission and tuition fees for the fist semester, OP didn’t commence the course and classes but thereafter arbitrarily demanded the payment of course fees for second semester. She felt foul play that is why she sought for the refund of the fees paid by her and for cancellation of her admission. OP failed to heed to her demand. Hence she felt deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 7. As against this it is contended by the OP that complainant was provisionally admitted for MBA subject to production of original documents, certificates pertaining to her degree. During the course of time they came to know that complainant has not completed B.Com degree she is yet to clear one subject. That fact is otherwise admitted by the complainant. So when the complainant is not eligible for the MBA course what made the OP to admit her to the said course and collect the fees is not known. Here we find the deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 8. Of course there are allegations and counter allegations with regard to commencement of the classes, their duration etc., but one thing is made clear to have admission for MBA course complainant must possess certain degree. Admittedly she has not completed the B.Com course. Of course in the mean time complainant expressed her desire to discontinue the said course on personal grounds and wrote a letter. The copy of the letter dated 10.03.2008 is produced where in she sought for the refund of fees paid by her. When OP didn’t heed to her request and demands she ultimately filed this complaint after lapse of 9 months. Correspondence made in that regard, reply given by the OP are produced.<br /> <br /> 9. On the close assessment of both oral and documentary evidence there is a proof that though OP collected the admission and tuition fees for the first semester it failed to impart the education. As such complainant withdrew from said course on some reason. When that is so, it would have been more fair on the part of the OP to refund the fees paid by her. It is not the case of the OP that because of untimely withdrawal from the said course by the complainant they suffered monetary loss and unable to fill up the said vacancy. Of course OP says that it has paid certain amount to the university for the registration. What is the amount that is paid is not known. Having considered all these facts and circumstances in our view justice will be met by directing the OP to refund Rs.15,000/-. With these reasons we answer point Nos.1 & 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following:<br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.15,000/- to the complainant. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 04th day of February 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> Vln* <br /> <br />