Further complainant submits that OP has promised to give marks-card but having not received till today shows their clear intention to cheat him by accruing money fraudulently. The complainant has opted the services to enjoy the benefits and to make career, but because of their unprofessional and lackadaisical attitude, he was unable to do so. This is clearly deficiency in service. Further complainant submits that the inaction of the OP is highly unreasonable, unethical, arbitrary, illegal and is opposed to established deficiency in service of OP and OP has made false promises and made him to wait for long. Hence, is guilty of deficiency of service, complainant is entitled for relief claimed. Hence, complainant is entitled to marks-card for two years MBA and OP is liable to pay Rs.2,00,000/- compensation for causing harassment, loss of career, financial hardship etc.,
Further complainant submits that he has issued legal notice to OP on 16.05.2019 or which OP has sent reply dated 01.06.2019 requested him to provide the student details. Accordingly, complainant has sent reminder notice giving all details on 15.06.2019 and on 30.07.2019, for which there is no response. The cause of action for the complaint initially arose on 2012 when he passed the Final exam and marks-sheet were downloaded. Further the cause of action has arisen on day to day basis, mail, phone and personal communication from 28.12.2012 till today further, notice dated 16.05.2019. Hence, this complaint.
3. After issuance of notice, OP did appear through his counsel and filed version. OP submits that complaint filed by complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts and hence it is liable to be dismissed in limine. Further OP submits that complainant has suppressed the real facts with regard to his admission, course fee and complainant has concocted and created this complaint to have an unlawful gain, which has to put to strict proof. Further OP submits that complainant has admitted himself to CMJ University to MBA-HR in June 2010 by paying Rs.2 lakhs as full course fee and stated that complainant has not having all receipts but he is having receipt for Rs.20,000/- only, which clearly shows the attitude of complainant that he has not approached with clean hands before this Commission. Further OP submits that complainant has suppressing the real facts. Further OP submits that complainant had approached the OP CIRD business school requesting to have a degree course of MBA in HR and at the same time, complainant requested the OP to pay course fee in installments due to financial problem and obtained admission and having full faith for his innocence, forwarded his admission to the CMJ University to take the exams, the complainant has not turned out nor paid the balance course fee. After a lapse of 9 years, complainant has issued legal notice to CIRD School to issue marks-card for which OP has also sent reply dated 01.06.2019 guiding the complainant to come and approach with entire details of information for which complainant with malafide intention and just to escape from the balance course fee, he has filed this complaint. It is further submitted that when there is a negligence on the part of complainant, deficiency of service from OP does not arise at all and there is no liability.
Further OP submits that CMJ has issued authorization letter to CIRD School for only period of 2012-2013 and has authorized to provide information, other related assistance to the students willing to study that is only for a period 2 years and after the expiration of the authorization, the CMJ University automatically cancels the authorization center. Further OP submits that CMJ has filed SLP-19617/2013 judgement dated 31.05.2013 and W app 16/2013 and foundations had filed a WP(c) No.177/2014 for controversy of appointment of V C and on its guilty of mismanagement. It is further submits that after final orders, the CMJ University has issued Public Notice on 06.11.2015 and stated that “All the students of CMJ University must produced their details of information with original documents at the time of verification process in person and after completion of this process, original certificate/degree certificate will be granted to concerned students and list of verified students will be sent to all concerned State Education Department for information.” It is further submits that CMJ University has announced is results in its website, accordingly, complainant has taking undue advantage of not paying the balance fee and more over he has approached the University get the marks-card without furnishing the proper details and this Commission has to observe the marks-card sheet extract which CMJ University has clearly stated that “Marks Sheet not yet issued by University” as mentioned on the right top of the extract. Hence, complaint filed by complainant is far from truth which is vexatious, unjust and unsustainable in law or on facts. On this ground itself, the complaint is not maintainable. It is further submits that the complainant has filed this complaint after lapse of 9 years, hence, it is barred by law of limitation. Therefore, Op has prays to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost.
4. The complainant has tendered his evidence by way of affidavit and also produced documents in support of his case which are marked as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.6. The complainant has also filed Certificate affidavit under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The OP has also filed affidavit evidence along with documents which are marked as Ex.B.1 to B.4. Both complainant and OP have filed their written arguments.
Heard learned counsels for both sides.
5. By way of filing version, the OP has taken specific contention stating that the complaint filed by the complainant is barred by limitation. According to the OP, the present complainant has filed this complaint after long lapse of 9 years. Issuance of notice will not fix the period of limitation to the present complaint. We gone through the contentions of the complaint and also version, no doubt this complaint is filed after long lapse of 9 years. But according to the complainant after completion of final year and also after declaring result, he was insisting the OP for issuance of marks-card, but there was no response. Then he issued legal notice dated 16.05.2019 for which OP has answered to it. According to us, the limitation is the continuing process, unless and until the grievances of the complainant get redressed. This Commission has taken judicial note that there was a dispute between the OP with CMJ Foundation through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Megahalaya, Visitor through the Principal Secretary to the Governor of Meghalaya, Shilong, Principal Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shilong in W.P.(C) No.177/2014 and the same was disposed off by detailed judgement on 16.07.2015, OP has been affiliated to the CMJ University. The Hon’ble National Commission in catena of the decision repeatedly held that cause of action is the recurrent until the grievance of the complainant being redressed. In this context, we find that the complaint filed by complainant is in time.
6. Now turning to another contention taken by the OP that the complainant is not a Consumer. The Hon’ble National Commission in Manu Solanki and 8 others Vs. Vinayaka Mission University reported in 2020(1) CPR 773 NC wherein the Hon’ble National Commission has classified in which type of case the students are comes and not comes within the purview of the C.P.Act.
The said order has been challenged by the Vinayaka Mission University before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal Diary No(s).12901/2020. Upon hearing, the Court pass the following order:
“1. Delay condoned.
2. Since there are divergent views of this Court bearing on the subject as to whether an educational institution or University would be subject to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the appeal would require admission.
3. Admit.
4. Mr.Soumyajit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the caveator, states that the counter affidavit would be filed within six weeks from today.
5. Service on the second proforma respondent is dispensed with.”
In view of the matter pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in respect of adjudicating the issue in question, whether the student is a consumer, we are of the opinion to placed the reference on the earlier judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Civil Appeal Nos.7003-7004 of 2015 (Special Leave to Appeal (c) No(s):2523-2524/2003) – P.Sreenivasulu and another Vs. P.J.Alexander and another where in it is held in para that
“Under the circumstances, an educational institution would come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the decision rendered by the Madras High Court would no longer be good law. Under the circumstances, we hold that the complaint filed before the State Commission was maintainable. Accordingly, we set aside the judgement and order dated 12.09.2002 passed by the National Commission and remand the matter to the State Commission for its decision on merits”
Hence, we come to conclusion that complainant is a Consumer.
7. The one more contention taken by the OP is that the issuance of marks-card is the duty of the CMJ University. The reliefs i.e. sought for by the complainant for issuance of marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate. In the instant case, the said University is not a party. Even after taking this contention, complainant ought to have been diligent to add the said University as one of the OP, but he did not do so. But any how, the C.P.Act, 2019 is a relief orientated Act. If the party is entitled for relief the sought for to grant such reliefs without affecting the rights of the other parties. In this context, we discuss the issue in question hereunder.
8. It is not in dispute that the complainant has admitted to the OP Institution and paid initial amount of Rs.20,000/-. According to him, other receipts are misplaced, but total fee ought to have been paid by the complainant was Rs.2,00,000/-. This fact specifically denied by OP in its version stating that the complainant has paid only Rs.20,000/- as part payment in installment towards the course fee to CIRD on 28.12.2012 and the course fee to the said course is Rs.40,000/- per year and totally for 2 years course fee is Rs.80,000/- has to be paid by the complainant out of which he has paid only Rs.20,000/- on 28.12.2012. On going through the available materials on record, complainant except producing the receipt for Rs.20,000/-, nothing is placed on record of paying balance course fee of Rs.60,000/-. Now the question that crop up for our consideration is whether the OP is the authority for issuance of marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate? In this context, the OP has specifically stated that it is not a competent authority for issuance of the marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate, but it is the only CMJ University which is competent authority to issue the same. In this context, the OP has place the reliance of documents produced by the complainant which is marked as Ex.A.2 wherein it is shown that “Marks sheet not yet issued by the University”. Referring to the said marks sheet draw out attention at para 13 of the written arguments filed by OP reads thus:-
“When the CMJ University has announced its results in its website: and at the same time which will be displayed on the notice board of CIRD school for notice of students, accordingly, the complainant has searched in the website on basis of his enrollment verification and he has find marks card extract of pass, only on that basis, the complainant taking undue advantage trying to extract the marks card without paying the process fee, e.g. the balance fee, and more over the complainant has not approached the CMJ University or the CIRD school to get the marks card without furnishing the proper details and further this Hon’ble Court has to observe the marks card sheet extract produced by the complainant which the CMJ University has clearly stated that “Marks sheet not yet issued by University” has mentioned on the right hand top of the extract, when this is the legal fact he complainant has suppressed the facts and evidence before this Hon’ble Court has filed this false complaint which is vexatious and not maintainable and more over the CMJ University is the only authority to issue the marks card/degree certificate on proper verification and the opposite party has no any right or authority to issue marks card. Hence the complainant filed by the complaint is for from the truth, which is vexatious, no prima facie and unsustainable in law or facts which has to be dismissed.”
We place the reliance on the above contents of para No.13, we find that there is no considerable force in the contention taken by the OP.
9. Looking to the available materials on record complainant has not put his entire effort to get the marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate by paying the balance amount/process fee to the OP. We place the reliance on the contents of the Ex.B.4 which the Public Notice issued by the CMJ University on 6th November, 2015 in Times of India in page No.14 in Bangalore Edition stating that “All the concerned students of CMJ University must produce their details of information with original documents at the time of verification process in person at the above mentioned address as after completion of this process, original certificate/degree certificate will be granted to concerned students and life of verified students will be sent to the concerned State Education Department for Information”. If the complainant has complied the contents of the said notice, certainly OP would have process for issuance of the marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate and forward to CMJ University. In this context, we are of the opinion that since there is a laxity on the part of the complainant to get redress his remedy in obtaining the marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate from the CMJ University which is only authority to issue the same. In this regard, if we direct the complainant to pay the balance course fee and also process fee if any to the OP, OP to take further steps by intimating to the same to CMJ University for issuance of marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and consequential degree certificate., we hope ends of justice will meet. Hence, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
- We direct the complainant to pay the balance course fee of Rs.60,000/- and process fee if any within 15 days from the receipt of this order to the OP. If the OP has received the said course fee and process fee within 15 days, it is directed to send intimation to the CMJ University for furnishing the marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and for issuance of degree certificate to the complainant.
- We also direct the CMJ University in the event of receiving any intimation form the OP, it has to process for issuance of marks-card for the MBA-HR course for academic year 2010-2012 and also for issuance of degree certificate to the complainant.
- With these terms and conditions, this complaint is disposed off.
- Parties to bear their own costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 31st day of July, 2021)
