DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 29^th day of February 2020

Present   : Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member (President I/c)

                 : Smt.Vidya.A, Member                                                                               Date of Filing: 03/04/2019

CC No.108/2019

R.K Manjusha

W/o. C Madhavankutty                                                                                 -  Complainant

Shree Ganesh Vihar,

Racket Court Road,

Palakkad – 678014

(By Adv.K.N.Sreelatha)

            Vs

1.  Byju’s

The Learning App

Think and Learn Pvt .Ltd.

Koorkencherry, Thrissur.

2. The Capital Float Finance Company                                                            -  Opposite parties

Syamala Towers, Saligramam,

Vadapalani, Chennai.

O R D E R

By Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member (President I/c)

Brief facts of the complaint are:

                The complainant was canvassed and convinced by the 1^st opposite party to take Byju’s Learning App, for her daughter and as a result she availed the study programme.  The 1^st opposite party insisted that only initial payment of Rs.3,000/- need to be paid by the complainant to avail the programme and the rest of the amount can be paid by the complainant in instalments of Rs.4,500/- each to the 1^st opposite party.  Accordingly, the bank details of the complainant were given to the 1^st opposite party and signature was also obtained in the application form of the 1^st opposite party.  Also the 1^st opposite party conveyed to the complainant that the programme can be cancelled within fifteen days, if it is not found useful to the complainant’s daughter.  According to the complainant, after three weeks of availing the programme, complainant’s daughter got admission in a residential school at Coimbatore and was not able to continue the learning programme availed from the 1^st opposite party because the same programme was not allowed inside the campus of the concerned school; immediately after three weeks of availing the programme this matter was informed to the 1^st opposite party.  But even after two weeks, the 1^st opposite party did not respond to complainant’s request for cancellation of the programme.  When the complainant again contacted the 1^st opposite party and requested for cancellation, the 1^st opposite party directed the complainant to return the tablet immediately to try for cancellation as fifteen days period for cancellation is over.  Accordingly the complainant returned the tablet through courier on 28/01/2019 which was received by the 1^st opposite party.  So the complainant believed that the cancellation is effected and Rs.3,000/- initial payment paid to the 1^st opposite party is appropriated towards cancellation charges and sent a notice to the 1^st opposite party which was not claimed by the 1^st opposite party.  Then complainant received a call from the 2^nd opposite party informing her that she had availed a finance scheme from the 2^nd opposite party and the repayment starts from the month of February 2019 at the rate of Rs.4,500/- per month.  According to the complainant’s, she had not availed any finance for the programme and had not signed any papers for any finance scheme and the complainant knew about the 2^nd opposite party only when she received a call from the 2^nd opposite party.  Then complainant informed the 2^nd opposite party that she had never availed finance from the 2^nd opposite party, when the 2^nd opposite party threatened the complainant about the drastic consequences if payment is not made promptly and also warned that the opposite party will inform CIBIL etc.  Only then the complainant realized that a big fraud was committed by the opposite parties on the complainant.  The 1^st opposite party concealed that the complainant was made to avail a loan for the programme without her knowledge, convincing her that she is paying only Rs.54,000/- course fee in instalments to Byju’s.  The complainant only then has realized that an inflated amount of Rs.54,000/- was fixed for the programme including finance charges, interest of the 2^nd opposite party which shows gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.  Thereafter, the complainant sent a registered notice to the 2^nd opposite party who did not reply.  Complainant further pleads that he returned on 28/01/2019 by courier the tab given by the 1^st opposite party which the opposite parties have received and acknowledged.  According to the complainant her grievance was informed many times over phone to the 1^st opposite party who cannot ask the complainant to pay the entire course fee as the complainant had returned the tab within one month as per the direction of the 1^st opposite party and also has informed the opposite parties to cancel the programme earlier.  Even after receiving the tablet containing the study material, the 1^st opposite party did not cancel the programme which shows their deficiency in service.  Complainant also pleads that, complainant was left with no learning application and he was required to pay the instalments to the 2^nd opposite party which shows unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties.  Thus the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and complainant prays to this Forum to direct the 1^st opposite party to cancel the Byju’s Learning App to the complainant and to direct the 2^nd opposite party to close the loan because it is obtained by unlawful and unfair trade practice and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant towards the mental agony and sufferings occurred to her.

                The complaint was admitted and notices were sent to opposite parties 1 & 2.  The notices were served to the opposite parties 1 & 2, their names were called absent and they were set ex-parte. 

                Complainant filed chief affidavit and additional affidavit.  Exts.A1 to A7 were marked from the side of the complainant.  Complainant was also heard. 

                The following issues arise in this case. 

1. Whether there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of  opposite parties 1 & 2?
2. If so, the relief and cost available to the complainant?

Issues 1 & 2 in detail

                Complainant has filed Exts.A1 to A7 to prove her arguments.  Ext.A1 is a copy of lawyer notice along with acknowledgment card and postal receipt sent to the 1^st opposite party dated.26.01.2019.  This Ext.informs the 1^st opposite party that she wishes to cancel the Byju’s App Education programme immediately and asks them to appropriate Rs.3,000/- paid by her to the 1^st opposite party towards the said programme.  Ext.A2 is a copy of lawyer notice along with acknowledgment card sent to the 2^nd opposite party dated.23.02.2019.  Ext.A3 shows tracking of courier details dated.11/02/2019.  Ext.A4 is a copy of receipt for courier sent to the 1^st opposite party dated.28/01/2019.  Ext.A5 is the returned cover of 1^st opposite party dated.01/02/2019 along with remarks of postal authorities “intimation on 01/02/2019” “absent deposited”.  Ext.A6 is a message sent by the 2^nd opposite party dated.29/05/2019.  Ext.A7 is a notice sent by 2^nd opposite party to the complainant demanding Rs.13,500/- as full and final settlement of total outstanding amount of Rs.54,000/- which shows that the projected loan is false. 

                 We have perused the affidavits and documentary evidences produced by the complainant and observe that, complainant has availed the BYJU’s Learning Programme from the opposite parties; we further observe that this programme can be cancelled within fifteen days if the same is not found useful.  After three weeks of availing this programme complainant has informed the 1^st opposite party that she was not in a position to continue the learning programme as it is not allowed in the campus of the complainant’s daughter’s school.  We also find that as per the direction of the 1^st opposite party the complainant returned the tab on 28/01/2019 and the complainant has informed the opposite parties that she has not availed any finance scheme from them; also course fees of Rs.54,000/- was fixed for the programme including finance charges, interest etc. of the 2^nd opposite party which also shows commission of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the opposite parties.  We also view that the opposite parties cannot charge from the complainant the entire course fee of Rs.54,,000/- especially when complainant has returned the tab within one month and requested the opposite parties to cancel the learning programme much earlier.  That the 1^st opposite party did not cancel the programme even after their receiving the tablet containing the study material shows gross deficiency of service on their part.  Thus we find that both opposite parties have committed grave deficiency in service and unfair trade practice towards the complainant with the result that, she was left without the learning application programme of BYJU and she is also burdened with the liability to pay the alleged loan amount with the 2^nd opposite party which demonstrates that both opposite parties have committed gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice towards the complainant. 

                Hence we decide to allow the complaint.

                We order the opposite parties jointly and severally to cancel the BYJU’s Learning Application Programme availed by the complainant immediately and also to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only)  to the complainant towards mental agony and other sufferings undergone by her. 

                This order shall be executed within one month from the date of receipt of this order; otherwise complainant is also entitled to receive 9% interest on the total amount due to her from the date of this order till realization.  

Pronounced in the open court on this the 29^th day of February 2020.

                                                                                                                                                      Sd/-

                                     V.P.Anantha Narayanan         

                   Member (President I/c)

                                                                                                                       Sd/-               

                                                                                                                                    Vidya.A

                                Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1   -  A cpy of lawyer notice along with acknowledgment card sent to the 1^st opposite party

                    dated.26.01.2019

Ext.A2   -  A copy of lawyer notice along with acknowledgment card sent to the 2^nd opposite party

                   dated.23.02.2019

Ext.A3   -  Photocopy of tracking details of courier dated.11/02/2019

Ext.A4   -  Original receipt of courier sent to the 1^st opposite party dated.28/01/2019

Ext.A5   -  Returned postal cover of 1^st opposite party dated.01/02/2019 along with remarks of postal

                    authorities “intimation on  01/02/2019” “absent deposited”

Ext.A6   -  Photocopy of message sent by the 2^nd opposite party dated.29/05/2019

Ext.A7   -  Original notice sent by 2^nd opposite party to the complainant demanding Rs.13,500/- (Rupees

                   thirteen thousand five hundred only) as full  and final settlement of total outstanding amount

                   of Rs.54,000/- (Rupees fifty four thousand only) which shows that the projected loan is false

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

 NIL

Witness examined on the side of complainant

NIL

Witness examined on the side of opposite parties

NIL

Cost :     Nil