District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.224/2022.
Date of Institution: 26.04.2022.
Date of Order: 21.9.2022
Ms. Divya Choudahry, Daughter of Shatrughan Choudary, resident of House No. 1822, Sector-7D, Faridabad, District Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
CMS Business School, 17, Sheshardri Road, Gandhi Nagar, Bengaluru (Karnataka) – 560 009. Through its Dean/Principal Officer Dr, Harold Andrew Patrick.
…Opposite party……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana…………Member.
PRESENT: Pt. Umesh Gautam, counsel for the complainant.
Opposite party ex-parte vide order 25.08.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant applied for taking admission in M.B.A in the opposite party Institute and for which the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.5,55,000/- with the opposite party. Out of which the complainant deposited Rs.4,80,000/- on 21.10.2020 and 14.12.2020 respectively through NEFT/RTGS), whereas the balance amount of Rs.75,000/- was deposited in cash by the complainant. In fact, for the purpose of depositing the above said amount with the opposite parties, the complainant took an education loan of Rs.7,00,000/- from State Bank of India, for which the complainant had been making regular repayment of said loan amount in monthly instalments. Infact after depositing the above said amount, the complainant did not attend class of MBA in Institute of opposite party regularly because there was declaration of lockdown by Govt. of India due to Covid-19, besides this the complainant met with an incident due to Gas Geyser Toxicity poisoning on 13.12.2021 and she remained hospitalized in Metro Heart Institute, Faridabad as well as in Med Hope /clinic, Sector 21A, Faridabad, for a long period. Even at that time the complainant informed the opposite party about the above said incident very much within time. The complainant asked several times to the opposite party to return back the above said amount to the complainant, but the opposite party always avoided it on one pretext or the other and did not make the repayment of the said amount to the complainant till date. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) refund back the amount of Rs.5,55,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization of whole amount.
b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Notice issued to opposite party on dated 20.07.2022 not received back either served or unserved. Tracking details filed in which it had been mentioned that “Item Delivery confirmed.” Mandatory period of 30 days expired. Therefore, opposite party was hereby proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 25.08.2022.
3. The Complainant led evidence in support of his respective version.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party– CMS Business School with the prayer to: a) refund back the amount of Rs.5,55,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of its due till realization of whole amount. b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW-1/A – affidavit of Divya Choudhary, Ex.C-1 - certificate dated 30.09.2021, Ex.C-2 – Medical certificate, Ex.C-3 - Provisional Admission letter,, Ex.C-4 – Expenditure certificate., Ex.C-5 – Sanction letter, Ex.C-6 – C8 e-Receipt for payment, Ex.C-9 – email, Ex.C-10 – account statement for the period 17.07.2020 to 17.07.2020 (page 1 to 4), Ex.C-11 – legal notice, Ex.C-12 – postal receipt, Ex.C-13 – email dated 7.6.2021,
6. During the course of arguments, counsel for the complainant has made a statement that “We are ready for deductions as per the classes taken by the complainant.”
7. There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid ex-parte evidence of the complainant. Since opposite party has not come present to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid ex-parte evidence it is amply proved that opposite party has rendered deficient services to the complainant. Hence the complaint is allowed against opposite party.
8. Opposite party is directed to deduct the 1/3rd of the paid amount. Opposite party is also directed to pay the balance amount alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization to the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alongwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 21.09.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
