DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT of Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no.- 01/2014
Date of Institution 01/01/2014
Order reserved on 31/08/2016
Date of Order 31/08/2016
In matter of
Mr Mohit Chabra, adult
s/o- Jugal Kishore
R/o- A-44, Nanda Road,
Adarsh Nagar, New Delhi -…………………………………...…………….Complainant
Vs
The Manager,
Delhi Paramedical and Management Institute
RO- B-20, New Ashok Nagar,
Delhi -110096 ……….………………………………………………………..Respondents
Complainant’s Advocate ……Md Jyoti Bajaj
Opponent’s Advocate …….Rajesh Sharma
Quorum Sh Sukhdev Singh President
Dr P N Tiwari Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari Member
Brief Facts of the case
This complaint was filed by complainant before CDRF, North, Tis Hazari on 11/12/2013 and was dismissed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of Forum.
After taking certified true copy of complaint, he filed in this Forum.
The complainant had paid a sum of Rs 10,000/- to OP, Delhi Paramedical and Management Institute (DPMI) for a professional course named “ DMCAJ” and a receipt was isued vide sn 15832 dated 31/08/2013. Complainant also paid dress and books charges Rs 1325/-.
The tentative date for the classes to start was given 08/10/2013 along with a email massage. On reaching the scheduled date to attend the classes, there were no classes. After inquiring from the office of OP, it was told that there were no students, so classes could not start.
When OP could not start classes on the date given, complainant gave notice for refund of his admission fee with other charges which were taken by OP, but OP did not refund the charges.
He filed this complaint here and claimed the refund of fee paid with 18% interest and compensation of a sum of Rs 50,000/- and Rs 30,000/- as legal expenses.
After perusal of complaint, notice was issued which was served and but OP did not put up its appearance, so case was proceeded Ex Parte. Complainant filed his Exparte evidence on affidavit.
Arguments were heard and order was reserved.
We have gone through the facts and evidence on affidavit, it was clear that complainant had taken admission at OP and classes could not be started on the scheduled date, so, he applied for refund of his fee paid to OP.
Being this case pertaining to Education institution, so we analysed legal issues and related higher courts citation.
We observed the following citations as –
- Sahgal School of Competition vs Dalbir Singh- RP813/2009, decided on 30/04/2009.
- National Commission held that – “all institutions to refund the money of the students for the period. They have not attended the college/institution”.
- Nipun Nagar vs Symbiosis Institute of International Business-I(2009)CPJ3(NC)- The view was taken that institutions have to refund the fee.
- FIIT JEE Ltd vs BB Popli-RP 1805/2007(NC)
- Brilliant Tutorials vs Rahul Dass- RP 2660/2007(NC)
- FIIT JEE Ltd vs Dr Minathi Rath-RP 3365/2006(NC)
- Director, Mahatma Gandhi Uni. vs Gopal Kumar, 1999(1)CPC292NC
It was held in all above citations that education institutions and Universities fall under the ambit of Consumer Protection Act and amounts deficiency of services. Hence refund was ordered in all the citations after deducting service cahrges, if applicable.
Therefore in this case, OP’s deficiency is seen and complainant has proved so. So we allow the complaint and pass the following order—
- OP will refund the fee and other charges paid by the complainant with 9% interest from the date of filing this complaint within 30 days.
- We also award compensation of a sum of Rs 5000/ as harassment caused due to deficient services of OP.
- We also award litigation charges a sum of Rs 1500/-.
If order is not complied in time essence, all the awarded amount shall carry the same interest till realised.
The order copy be sent to the parties as per act and file be consigned to the record room.
Mrs Harpreet Kaur- Member (Dr) P N Tiwari - Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh - President
