BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 16/11/2009

Date of Order : 29/10/2011

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.

Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

C.C. No. 607/2009

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. Briefly stated, the facts leading to this complaint are :

The 1^st opposite party is a computer institute. Lured by the advertisements of the opposite parties, the complainant joined CCSA (CMS Certified System Administrator Course) at the 1^st opposite party on 12-01-2008. The complainant paid a sum of Rs. 500/- and Rs. 25,843/- towards registration and course fees respectively. The teachers who were in charge of classes for the course are incapable, inexperienced and inadequate for the job. Though the complainant asked to refund the fees, the opposite parties promised job placement after the completion of the course. The opposite parties some how completed the course. The complainant served with 64% marks and issued a certificate to the complainant. But the opposite parties failed to provide placement to the complainant. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking the following reliefs :

1. To direct the opposite parties to refund Rs. 26,343/- the fees collected by them.

2. To direct the opposite parties to provide placement as offered by them.

3. To pay a compensation of Rs. 25,000/- and costs of the proceedings.

2. The version of the opposite party :

The opposite party admits the enrollment of the complainant in the institute for CCSA carear and programme and the receipt of the fees. The opposite party has engaged trained faculties and each topic is attended to in detail. Neither the complainant nor the other students raised complaints regarding the faculty or the classes or the modules. The complainant passed the course in his second attempt. The institute has been giving on the job training stipend to students who had successfully completed the course, the complainant was infact sent by the placement officer of the institute for interview in a concern by name M/s. Jupiter India Pvt. Ltd., but the company rejected his application for lack of academic qualification and communication skills. Thereafter, the complainant had not contacted the institute or the placement officer. The complainant is not entitled for any of the reliefs as prayed for.

3. The witness for the complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts. A1 to A12 were marked on his side. Witness for the opposite party was examined as DW1 and Exts. B1 and B2 were marked on their side. Heard the counsel for the parties.

4. The points that arose for consideration are :-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the fees refunded?

2. Whether the opposite parties are liable to give placement to the complainant?

3. Compensation and costs of the proceedings?

5. Point No. i. :- The following facts are undisputed by the parties :-

1. The complainant joined CCSA course offered by the opposite parties.

2. The complainant paid a total sum of Rs. 26,143/- towards admission fees and course fees evidenced by Exts. A1 to A4.

3. The complainant successfully completed the course evident from Ext. A9 certificate issued by the opposite parties.

6. The complainant could not mount the box to substantiate his contentions, since he had already been working abroad and his father alone was examined as PW1 instead. During evidence, he admitted that he has no direct knowledge about the opposite parties and the course offered by them, he has only hearsay information about the same which is not admissible in evidence as per law and uncontroverted. So, the evidence of PW1 is not at all helpful for the redress of this complaint.

7. Admittedly, the complainant did not go to raise any complaint against the opposite parties or their course or the faculty during the currency of the course. Moreover, he has rated the faculties, infrastructure availability and sports and guidance, in Exts. B1 and B2 feed back form when the complainant rated 9 out of 10 in some cases 10 out of 10 seemingly rightly so. Though the complainant has challenged the genuineness of Exts. B1 and B2, nothing is on record to corroborate the same. It is worthwhile to note that the complainant has successfully completed and passed the examination conducted by the opposite parties. Having promptly attended the classes rated by the opposite parties in high standard and passed the examination and the subsequent outcry is bad at law. In short, the complainant is not entitled to get refund of the fees from the opposite parties.

8. The opposite parties maintain that they could not provide placement to the complainant due to lack of previous qualification and communication skills. Admittedly, the opposite parties offered placement to the complainant as per Ext. A6 Student Rules and Regulations sheet. Though the opposite parties sent the complainant to a company, they did not accept the complaint for reasons of their own. Thereafter, neither did the complainant approach the opposite parties, nor did the opposite parties contact the complainant. Ext. A6 goes to show that the complainant has only completed pre-degree examination the required qualification for placement as offered by the opposite parties at their option. In the interest of a genuine consumer dispute, this Forum is of the considered option that the opposite parties of such genuine repute would go to or extend to favour and satisfy the genuine request and concern of the complainant in question in all respects which would definitely be appreciated in applause.

9. Point No. iii. :- Deficiency in service or unfair trade practice not been substantiated, no order as no compensation or costs are called for and neither ordered.

10. For the forgoing discussions, the proceedings in this complaint stands closed.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 29^th day of October 2011.

Sd/- A. Rajesh,President.

Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.

Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :-

=========