BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,   REWARI.

                                                Consumer Complaint No: 381of 2013.

Date of Institution:  15.10.2013.  

Date of Decision:    04.03.2015

Sonam Yadav d/o Shri Beer Singh, r/o village Bagdola presently residing at Dwarka, Delhi.

                                                                            …....Complainant.

                                      Versus

Bright land College of Education Jant Sayarwas, Rewari, Haryana, through its Principal. ..

                                                                             ...…Opposite Parties.

Complaint Under Section 12  of Consumer Protection Act

        Before: Shri  Raj  Kumar ………. …..………..PRESIDENT      

                      Shri Kapil Dev Sharma…………………MEMBER

Present :          Shri Vikas Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.

                         Opposite party exparte.

                                                ORDER

 Per  Raj Kumar President

                                    Factual matrix comprising the case of the complainant, shorn of details, is that   the complainant took admission on 14.9.2011 in B.Ed class of one year course  and deposited the fee of Rs. 25,000/- out of which a sum of Rs. 5,000/- was a refundable security amount.  It is alleged that after completing the B.Ed course in 2013 , the complainant as assured by the opposite party requested for the refund of the said caution money but no heed was paid towards here requests; hence this complaint.

2)                         In reply, it is alleged that the very purpose of the security is that in case the student does not pay any dues at the last, then the same can be recovered through the security.  It is also averred that the complainant was to pay Rs. 1100/-  for late fee, Rs. 500/- lab maintenance charges and Rs. 3400/- absence fine which the complainant did not pay in spite of repeated requests and as such the same was adjusted from the security money with the consent of the complainant.  So, she is not entitled to any relief as claimed. In the end, dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.

3)                         When the case was fixed for evidence of the opposite party, it opted not to appear and as such it was proceeded exparte.

4)                         We have heard the counsel for the complainant and gone through the record available on the file thoroughly. 

5)                         A perusal of receipt Ex.CW-2 placed on the file goes to show that the complainant Sonam Yadav deposited a Sum of Rs. 25,000/- on 14.9.2011 with the opposite party. A perusal of the same also goes to show that Rs. 5,000/- were deposited under the head “Caution Money (refundable)”.  Admittedly, it is evident that Rs. 5,000/- were deposited as refundable caution money but the same as per the version of the opposite party could not be refunded as the complainant did not pay the dues of Rs.1100/- for late fee, Rs. 500/- lab maintenance charges and Rs.3400/- absence fine and as such the caution money was adjusted towards the same with the consent of the complainant.  There is no documentary evidence on the file to support this version.  There is nothing on the file to show whether any dues were pending or were ever demanded from the complainant. No consent as alleged is on the file.  Rather the complainant vide receipt Ex. CW-4 again paid the second instalment of Rs.11,000/- on 14.11.2011 to the opposite party which gives a presumption that nothing was due towards the complainant.   In the meantime, no correspondence whatsoever took place between the parties regarding the balance, if any as alleged by the opposite party is on the file.  There is nothing on the file to rebut the version of the complainant that the caution money is not refundable.     Not refunding the refundable caution money without any plausible and cogent reason is certainly a deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and the complainant cannot be left at jeopardy without any fault on her part.

6)                         In view of the above discussion and for the foregoing

reasons, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to refund the caution money of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the amount shall fetch interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of deposit till payment.  The complainant is also allowed compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,000/- and litigation expenses which are quantified at Rs. 5500/- against the opposite party to be paid within the above stipulated period.  Ordered accordingly.

Announced.

04.03.2015.

                                 Member                                       President,

                             DCDRF,Rewari.                    Distt. Consumer Disputes                                                                                 Redressal Forum, Rewari.