Date of Filing: 09-02-2015 Date of Final Order: 31-12-2015
The brief facts of the present case, as culled out from the record is that the Complainants, Sanjoy Hore, Bapi Roy, & Anupam Adhikary being students deposited Rs.68,000/- each to the O.P, Debasish Das to complete B.Ed course in the year 2013 and the O.P took all responsibility to complete their B.Ed course from B.Ed College, Haryana. Afterwards, the Complainants were informed that they have passed the said examination by the O.P. Thereafter, the Complainants asked for their Mark sheet from the O.P, but subsequently, the O.P informed to the Complainants that they were not qualified in B.Ed Examination, for which the Complainants prayed for reevaluation their answer sheet to the O.P. But the O.P did not arranged for reevaluation the answer sheet of the Complainants and he demanded money for the same. The Complainants might have passed the said Examination, if the O.P took proper steps for reevaluation of the answer sheet of the Complainants.
Due to such activities of the O.P, the Complainants did not pass B.Ed examination and also they have lost one year.
Hence, the Complainants filed the present case praying for issuing a direction upon the O.P to pay (i) Rs.2,04,000/- (Rs.68,000 X 3) as deposited money, (ii) Rs.30,000/- (Rs.10,000/- X 3) for mental agony & pain, (iii) Rs.45,000/- (Rs.15,000/- X 3) for financial loss, (iv) Rs.15,000/- (Rs.5,000/- X 3) for travelling Expenses and (v) Rs.30,000/- (Rs.10,000/- X 3) towards litigation costs, besides other relief(s) as the Forum deem fit, as per law & equity.
The O.P, Debasish Das has contested the case denying all material allegation of the complaint contending inter-alia that the case is not maintainable and the Complainant has no cause of action to bring the case. The main contention of the O.P is that the Complainants in the year 2013 came to the O.P as they knew that the O.P completed his B.Ed. course from Kurukshetra University and wherein they meet with the O.P and after talk they expressed their intention to completed their B.Ed Course from Kurukshetra University and that time the Complainants also requested to the O.P to take necessary steps and accordingly on request of the Complainants, the O.P through Ram Narayan Institute of Education, Kurukshetra admitted them in B.Ed. Course for the session 2013-14 after paying proper fees to the said institution and against such payment the said institute has given them bonafide certificate. After such admission, Ram Narayan Instituted of Education supply proper study materials time to time to the Complainants for their course with their full satisfaction. Thereafter the Complainants appeared in the B.Ed. examination. After publication of result, the Complainants found that they are not qualified in B.Ed. examination. After knowing such result they again contact with the O.P and requested him to take steps for reevaluation of their each papers. On the Complainants request that time the O.P, again contacted with the Ram Narayan Institution of Education and from there the O.P came to know that the Complainants are not entitled for reevaluation of their answer sheet as because as par rules of Kurukshetra University reevaluation shall not be permitted where a student has obtained less than 20% marks in a particular paper. Students are not entitled for reevaluation can get the answer books re-checked in terms of Clause 25.1 of Ordinance-I General Rules. The O.P personally collected mark sheet from the said institution and after collecting the same the O.P on several times over phone contacted with the Complainants and requested them to collect their mark sheet from him. But till this date they have not collected their mark sheets from this O.P. From the mark sheets of the Complainants it reveal that, the Complainants obtained below 20% marks in their each paper as a result they are not eligible for reevaluation of their exam papers.
Ultimately, this answering O.P prayed for dismissal of the case with sufficient costs.
In the light of the contention of the complainant, the following points necessarily came up for consideration.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Are the Complainants a Consumer as per Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Has the O.P any deficiency in service as alleged by the Complainants and is he liable in any way?
- Whether the Complainants are entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully, perused the entire documents in the record also heard the argument by the parties at a length.
Point No.1.
At the time of hearing of argument, the Ld. Agent/Adv. of the O.P submitted that the Complainants are not consumer U/S 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986.
He further submitted that the students are not consumer under the College or University.
In support of his contention he cited a ruling reported in 2015 (2) WBLR (CPNC) 196, where Hon’ble National Commission relying upon ruling reported in 2009 (8) SCC 483/2010 (2) WBLR (SC) 33 pleased to hold that the Educational Institution are not service provider and students are not consumer.
But in the present case, Educational Institution viz Ram Narayan Institute of Education and Kurukshetra University have not been made party to the case.
Certainly, no case is maintainable against them.
However, we find that in the present case, the O.P success Education is Agency, who arrange for admission of the students in Ram Narayan Institute of Education and other Institution on receiving fees.
So, the O.P success Education neither a College nor an University or Examination Board.
Accordingly, the said ruling is not applicable in this case and the Complainants are consumer under the O.P, Success Education as they have taken service from the O.P after payment of requisite fees.
Point No.2.
Office of the O.P is situated within jurisdiction of this Forum and the complaint value of this case is Rs.3,24,000/-, which is far less than Rs.20,00,000/- i.e. maximum pecuniary limit of the Forum.
So, this Forum has pecuniary as well as territorial jurisdiction to try the case.
Point No.3 & 4.
Both points are taken up together for convenience of discussion.
The Complainants, Sanjoy Hore and two others in their complaint and evidence stated that being students deposited Rs.68,000/- each to the O.P, Debasish Das to complete B.Ed course in the year 2013 and the O.P took all responsibility to complete their B.Ed course from B.Ed College, Haryana.
Though the Complainants have been claiming that they have paid Rs.68,000/- each totaling Rs.2,04,000/- but receipts submitted by the Complainants show that the Complainant No.1, Sanjoy Hore has paid Rs.40,000/-, The Complainant No.2, Bapi Roy has paid Rs.54,500/- and the Complainant No.3, Anupam Adhikary has paid Rs.46,500/- to the O.P, Debasish Das to complete the B.Ed course.
On the other hand it is the specific case of the O.P that the Complainants also requested to the O.P to take necessary steps and accordingly on request of the Complainants, the O.P through Ram Narayan Institute of Education, Kurukshetra admitted them in B.Ed. Course for the session 2013-14 after paying proper fees to the said institution and against such payment the said institute has given them bonafide certificate.
Copy of bonafide Certificates dated 11/10/2013 submitted by the O.P and issued by Ram Narayan Institute of Education show that Rs.48,200/- each has been deposited as tution fee and other charge on behalf of the Complainants, Sanjoy Hore, Bapi Roy and Anupam Adhikary to Ram Narayan Institution of Education for B.Ed course.
It is not the case of the Complainants that the said documents are fake or forged documents.
Mark sheets of the Complainants, Sanjoy Hore, Bapi Roy and Anupam Adhikary filed by the parties show that they appeared in B. Ed Examination, 2014 and Mark Sheets have been issued to them.
So, it is clear from our above made discussion that the O.P has received money from the Complainants for arrangement of their B.Ed Course and duly deposited proper Tuition Fee and other fees on their behalf.
It is the case of the Complainants that firstly they were informed by the O.P that they have passed the examination but subsequently, they came to know that they have not qualified in B.Ed Examination. But the copy of the Mark sheets show that all the Complainants have not passed the Examination.
It is the case of the Complainants that they might have passed the Examination if got opportunity for re-evaluation of the Answer Sheets if the O.P took proper action.
During hearing of argument, Ld. Agent/Advocate of the O.P submitted that the Complainants have obtained less than 20% marks in several papers. So, they are not entitled for re-evaluation of their answer papers and drew our attention to re-evaluation Rules of Kurukshetra University, which reveals that re-evaluation shall not be permitted where a student obtained less than 20% in a particular paper.
On scrutiny of the Mark sheets of the Complainants, we find that certainly they have obtained less than 20% marks in several papers.
So, as per rule, they are not entitled for re-evaluation of answer sheets.
More so, after taking admission, the Complainants went to their College and appeared in Examination.
So, we failed to understand why the Complainants are casting duty upon the O.P for taking arrangement for re-evaluation of their papers.
We further find that the Complainants have some grievance against the Ram Narayan Institute of Education and Kurukshetra University. But they are not made party to the present case.
Obviously, in view of the ruling reported in 2015 (2) WBLR (CP NC) 196 and 2009 (8) SCC 483, no case can lie against such Institute or University.
Considering over all matters into consideration, we find that the O.P has performed his duty by depositing requisite fees of the Complainants/students in Ram Narayan Institute of Education and the Complainants have got opportunity to appear in the said B. Ed Examination but failed to secure Pass Marks in several subjects.
So, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.
Accordingly, we constrain to hold that the Complainants have failed to prove their case and the case is liable to be dismissed.
So, these points are decided against the Complainants.
Ultimately, the case fails.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that,
The present Case No. CC/8/2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest without any costs against the O.P.
A plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied to the parties by hand/Registered post, free of cost with A/D.
Dictated and corrected by me.
President President
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar
Member Member
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar Redressal Forum, Cooch Behar
