Delhi

East Delhi

CC/863/2013

Anand Krishnan - Complainant(s)

Versus

BRILLANT TUTORIAL - Opp.Party(s)

11 Dec 2013

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE; SAINI ENCLAVE: DELHI-92

CC No.863/2013:

In the matter of:

1. Anand Krishnan
2. Abhay Shankar

 

Both sons of Sh. P.K. ThrivikramanUnni

B – 138/S – 2, Bharat Apartments,

Shalimar Garden Extension – II,

Sahibabad, Ghaziabad (U.P)

Also At:

C/o. M.A. Venkata Subramanian at

B – 304, Apex Apartments, Plot No.GHS – 3,                                                       

Sector – 45, Gurgaon – 122 003 (Haryana)

 Complainant

Vs

 

1. M/s Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.

            50 – C, KAlu Sarai,

New Delhi – 110 016

 

2. M/s Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.

            13, Pratap Nagar, MayurVihar, Phase – I,

Delhi – 110 091

 

3.  Brilliant Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.

            12, Masilamani Street,

            T-Nagar, Chennai-600017    

            (Through its Managing Director Smt. VasanthiNeelakantan)

 

4. Career Launchers

55 B, 1^st Floor, Kalu Sarai, Near Metro Station,

Near Azad Apartments, New Delhi – 110 016

(Through its Founder & Chairman Sh.R. Satyanarayanan)

•  

                                                                                           Date of Admission:  24/10/2013  

                                                                                           Date of Order         :  18/06/2015  

ORDER

Ms.Poonam Malhotra, Member:

 

            This complaint has been filed with the allegation that both the complainants sons ofSh. P.K. Thrivikraman Unni wanted to appear in Common Entrance Examinations scheduled in 2012 namely IIT/JEE–2012, AIEEE, etc. for admission into premier engineering colleges.  Lured by the assurances of the respondents the complainants got enrolled with Respondent No.I for One-Year Program “Board-cum-One Year Classroom Program” (B-OYCP) and Enrolment Nos.I1RS12DE0013 and I1RS12DE0014 were allotted to Anand Krishnan &Abhay Shankar respectively. The complainants paid Rs.1,13,277/- in all as the course fee for the One-Year Program till March, 2012.  The Respondent Nos.I & II conducted classes for the said program from 01/05/2011 to 15/10/2011.The Respondent Nos.I & II abruptly stopped conducting the classes after the second week of October, 2011 but promised to resume the classes with effect from 01/11/2011. On 10/11/2011, the Respondent No.II sent a notification to the complainants through an e-mail explaining the reasons for non-commencement of classes by 09/11/2011and expresses their hoped to resume the classes by the next week.  Classes were not resumed as promised and had infact been virtually closed down without any prior intimation or notice.  Despite repeated enquiries for the date of resumption of classes through letters and phone calls, the Respondent Nos.I to III did not respond.  On 18/11/2011 the complainants allege to have received an e-mail from Respondent No.II intimating its arrangement with another company called CL-Educate for resumption of classes within a week and another e-mail was received by the complainant from Respondent No.IV confirming the said arrangement but the website of the respondents displayed that their arrangement would start off from January, 2012 only.  Taking note of the said discrepancy between the contents of the e-mails & website, the complainants wrote a letter to Respondent No.II seeking honoring of its promise with regard to the resumption of classes but in vain.  On 29/11/2011 the complainants allege to have received an e-mail from Respondent No.II intimating its tie-up arrangement with Career Launcher for few lessons for IIT – JEE/AIEEE at few Centers of Career Launcher’s but classes did not resume.  Had the respondents provided services to the complainants they would not have paid management fees paid by them for their admission into an Engineering College in Kerala.  The complainant has claimed refund of fee of Rs.1,13,277/- with interest thereon @ 12% p.a. from the date of receipt of each payment till its realization, refund of Rs.20,000/- paid to M/s. TOCAB Institute, Vivek Vihar, Delhi being the fee of Crash Course taken, pay Rs.1,30,000/- towards management fee paid for the admission of both the complainants with interest thereon @ 12% p.a., Rs.2,00,000/- on account of mental pain, agony and harassment.

 

            None put up appearance in response to the notices issued to the respondents and case proceeded exparte against them.

 

            Evidence by way of Affidavits filed by the complainants in support of their case have not been controverted by the respondents.

 

            Heard and perused the record.

 

          It is not in dispute that the complainants had taken admission into the Respondent Institute for the preparation of examination of IIT-JEE /AIEEE for One-Year Program “Board-cum-One Year Classroom Program” (B-OYCP) by making a payment of Rs.1,13,277/-.  The complainants have filed on record receipts and a copy of the bank Passbook as Annexures to the present complaint as proof of payments made to the Respondent Nos.I to III for the One-Year Program.   In the case in hand, the dispute is with regard to the coaching classes which were discontinued by the respondents without any prior intimation to the complainants.   It is pertinent to mention here that the Respondent Nos.I to III were under an obligation to provide uninterrupted coaching classes to the complainants after the receipt of consideration from them.   Discontinuance of the classes without affording any cogent reason after imparting coaching from 01/05/2011 to 15/10/2011 without any prior intimation to the complainants and without making alternate arrangements for the students enrolled with them for the said course after receiving payment of full One –Year Program fee in advance amounts to unfair trade practice on their part.  Such act of the respondents is wholly unjust and must be condemned in severest terms as they cannot be allowed to enrich them by playing with the career of students including the complainants without giving services to them in accordance with the fees received.  Students seek admission into coaching institutes like the respondents with great hopes in mind for seeking admission to professional courses in reputed universities for a bright future.  By their unprofessional attitude the dreams of the students of a shining bright future ahead had got shattered and the coaching imparted from 01/05/2011 to 15/10/2011 had been rendered infructuous due to abrupt discontinuation of the coaching classes by the respondents as the students after studying for sometime were left stranded.

Had the amount been refunded to the complainants on their request prior to the filing of this complaint, the complainants would not have been burdened with the litigation in hand and consequential harassment suffered by them.  Infact, the present litigation has been thrust upon them for getting refund of the hard earned money against which they was not provided services which the respondents were under an obligation to provide.  Not providing education after accepting the tuition fee is definitely a case of Unfair Trade Practice and deficiency in service on the part of the respondents and is highly unjust, against public policy and good conscious.

            It is a settled law that allegations raised in the complaint and reiterated in the affidavit and which have not been controverted by the respondents shall be taken to be true and there is no reason for us to disbelieve them. 

The complainants have not filed on record any cogent documentary evidence of having taken a Crash Course from M/s. TOCAB Institute, Vivek Vihar, Delhi.  In the absence of any credible evidence to substantiate their allegation, the refund of fee of Rs.20,000/- alleged to have been paid to  M/s. TOCAB Institute  for the Crash Course taken by them cannot be allowed.

 

            Since there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the Respondent No.IV, no liability can be cast upon it viz-a- viz the present complainants.

 

           Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration we allow this complaint and hold the Respondent Nos. I to III deficient in providing services to the complainants.  The Respondent Nos.I to III had been unfair and unjust in retaining the fees paid by the complainants.  The Respondent Nos.I to III are directed to refund the amount of Rs.1,13,277/-  to the complainants together with interest @9%p.a. thereon from the respective dates of payments till it is finally paid. The Respondent Nos.I to III have played with the careers and dreams of the students and have traumatized them in their very crucial academic year when they had to appear for board examinations besides the competitive exams for which they had enrolled with the said institute. besides wasting their precious time for which they need to be compensated. We award a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards compensation on account of harassment, mental pain and agony and the cost incurred by the complainantson the litigation. The entire amount should be paid by the Respondent Nos.I to III, jointly or severally, within 45 days from the date of this order. If the compensation and cost is not paid within 45 days, the complainants shall be entitled for interest on the amount of Rs.30,000/- @9% p.a. till paid.

 

             Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per rule.

 

                                                                                                     

 

(Subhash Gupta)                             (Poonam Malhotra)                             (N.A.Zaidi)          

  Member                                             Member                                       President