BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah , B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy , M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
Monday the 14th day of June, 2010
C.C.No. 114/09
Between:
Gooty Waseem, S/o. Gooty Shashavali,
H.No. 51/971-C, S.B.I.Colony, Near Pump House, Kurnool-518003 (A.P)
…..Complainant
-Vs-
Director Administration,Institute of Aeronautical and Marine Engineering,
H.No. 15/4,Opp To Ganapathy and Venkateswara Temple,80 feet Road, Padmanabhanagar, Bangalore- 560070.
…Opposite Party
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. P.Siva Sudharshan , Advocate, for complainant , and Sri M. Sivaji Rao , Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)
C.C. No.114/09
1. This complaint is filed under section 11 & 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 praying to direct the OP
a) to refund a sum of Rs. 77,800/- with interest from the date of receipt of the amount from the complainant to till the date of realization.
b) to grant the compensation for mental agony a sum of Rs.30,000/-
c) to grant the cost of the complaint of Rs.5,000/-
d) and to grant such other relief as this Hon’ble Forum may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as follows:- The OP circulated advertisement in daily news paper all over in A.P. inviting applications for AMIETE/ET& TC Course . In the advertisement it is stated that the institute is recognized under Director of Technical Education, Government of Karnataka. The complainant applied for prospectus. The OP collected a sum of Rs.300/- and supplied prospectus to complainant. The complainant filled the application and send the application to OP along with State Bank of India D.D for Rs.20,000/- dated 04-07-2008 . The OP received the application of the complainant and gave provisional admission letter dated 11-07-2008 to the complainant . The complainant received the said letter at Kurnool town. The complainant joined the course on 22-08-2008 . At the time of admission the complainant paid to the OP a sum of Rs.97,800/- . After
one month study the complainant found that the OP institute was not recognized by the Karnataka Government as stated in advertisement. Further there is no teaching staff and minimum infrastructural facilities. Immediately the complainant approached OP and demanded for refund of the amount. But the OP did not refunded the amount . In the month of November, 2008 the complainant received a cheque for Rs.20,000/- towards refund of fees by way of post at Kurnool. The OP did not pay the balance of Rs.77,800/- . The complainant issued a legal notice to the OP . The OP received the legal notice and not refunded the amount. Due to unfair trade practice of the OP the complainant lost one year valuable time and it caused lot of mental agony to the complainant and his parents. The OP committed acts of fraud amounting to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice . Hence the complaint.
3. OP filed written version stating that this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as provided U/s 11 of the C.P.Act 1986. The OP has been imparting tuition to the students appearing for the examinations conducted by the authorized Boards such as AIMIETE, AMAESI, etc at Bangalore which comes within the jurisdiction of the District Consumers Disputes Redressal Forum, Bangalore , Urban. OP is a tutorial institute and it impart to the students, who appear for the examinations conducted by the authorized Boards. OP is recognized U/s 36 of the Kerala Education Act. The OP has good teaching staff library, Computer lab etc.,. It arranges industrial visits and conducting educational tours to students . The OP provides hostel facility to students and it supplies books and identity cards to the students . There are well qualified lecturers and professors in the institute .
The complainant was admitted in the OP institute on 22-08-2008. More than 200 students have been taking tuition in the OP institute . The complainant left institute on 22-10-2008 stating that he is not keeping well . On 30-10-2008 the father of the complainant came to OP and gave letter stating that the complainant is not keeping well and demanded return of the certificates . On 07-11-2008 the father of the complainant approached the OP and informed that the complainant is unable to prosecute his studies for his personal reasons. The fees of Rs.20,000/- paid by the complainant on 04-07-2008 towards admission fees is not refundable. On 07-11-2008 when the father of the complainant came to collect the original documents of the complainant, the OP paid a sum of Rs.20,000/- through cheque drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank , Bangalore . The father of the complainant gave a receipt to that effect. The complaint is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A11 are marked . On behalf of the opposite parties Ex.B1 to B24 are marked .
5. On the basis of the above pleadings the points that arise for consideration are
(i) whether there is unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party ?
(ii) Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief.
(iii)whether this forum has got jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
iv) To what relief?
6. Point No. 1 & 2 : Admittedly the complainant joined in the OP institute on 22-08-2008 and paid an amount of Rs.97,800/- towards fees under various heads. Ex.B3 to B5 are the receipts issued by OP. It is also admitted that an amount of Rs.20,000/- was refunded to the complainant by OP through a cheque bearing No.000232 .The complainant filed the present complaint for refund of balance of Rs.77,800/- with interest. It is the case of the complainant that the OP institute was not recognized by Karnataka Government as stated in the advertisement and that there was unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The OP in order to show that the institute was recognized by the Karnataka Government filed Ex.B1. It shows that institute was recognized U/s 36 of the Kerala Education Act. The contention of the complainant that OP institute is not a recognized one is not supported by any evidence. The complainant wants refund of balance of Rs.77,800/-.Admittedly the complainant discontinued his studies . According to the complainant there was no sufficient teaching staff and minimum infrastructural facilities mentioned in the prospectus . As seen from the documents filed by OP it is very clear that the OP institute was organizing industrial tours and eminent professors were attending the institute . According to the OP the complainant left the institute as he was unwell . To show that the complainant was unwell and he was not interested in prosecuting the studies , the OP filed Ex.B14 photo copy of the letter of complainants father dated 30-10-2008 . In the said letter addressed to OP by the father of the complainant it is stated that health condition of his son was not well and that he was taking the luggage of the son. From the contents of Ex.B14 it is very clear that the complainant stopped his studies because of his ill health . There is no mention in Ex.B14 letter addressed by the father of the complainant that the complainant discontinued his studies as OP institute is unrecognized and that it had no infrastructural facilities. Ex.B7 is the letter addressed by the father of the complainant for cancellation of admission for his boy dated 07-11-2008 . In the said letter it is stated that he will not claim any of the refund of the fees and that he received the original documents in good condition. The father of the complainant received the certificates of the complainant stating that his son was unwell and he was not in a position to prosecute his studies . The complainant failed to establish that OP institute is not recognized and that it has no infrastructural facilities . As seen from the record it is very clear that the complainant discontinued his studies due to his ill health . Any how on the request of the father of the complainant the OP institute refunded Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant by way of cheque. There was no unfair trade practice or deficiency of service as stated by the complainant on the part of the OP . As the complainant himself discontinued his studies , the complainant is not entitled for the refund of the amount of Rs.77,800/- as claimed.
7. Point No.3: Admittedly the OP institute is situated at Bangalore. The present complaint is filed by the complainant before this forum alleging that the cause of action arose at Kurnool where the complainant received cheque for Rs.20,000/- dated 11-08-2008 along with covering letter from the OP. Sec 11 of the Act provides that the complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction , the OP resides or carries on business , or has a branch office or personally works for gain. It also provides that the complaint shall be instituted in the District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action wholly or in part arises. In the present case admittedly the OP institute is imparting education at Bangalore . The complainant joined in OP institute and discontinued his studies. As the OP institute is situated at Bangalore , the District Forum , Bangalore has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint . It is also case of the complainant that the cause of action arose at Kurnool where he received the cheque for Rs.20,000/- . It is the case of the OP that cheque for Rs.20,000/- was received by complainants father at Bangalore on 07-11-2008 . The complainant did not place any documentary evidence to show that he received cheque dated 07-11-2008 for Rs.20,000/- along with a covering letter through a post. On the other hand the OP filed Ex.B23 photo copy of the payment voucher where in it is mentioned that the complainants father received the cheque dated 07-11-2008 for Rs.20,000/ at Bangalore . The allegations of the complaint that he received the cheque dated 07-11-2008 for Rs.20,000/- at Kurnool is proved to be false. No cause of action arose at Kurnool . I am of the firm view that this forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
8. Point No.4:. In the result , the complaint is dismissed. In the circumstances of the case without costs.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her , corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 14th day of June, 2010.
Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of letter of the OP dt.11-07-08.
Ex.A2. Photo copy of letter of the OP to the Complainant
dt.16-07-2008..
Ex.A3. Photo Copy of Receipt for Rs.25,000/- dt.22-08-08.
Ex.A4. Photo Copy of Hostel fee receipt for Rs.32,000/-
dt.22-08-08.
Ex.A5. Photo Copy of Receipt for Rs.7,900/- dt.15-10-08.
Ex.A6. Photo Copy of Demand draft In favour of OP Rs.20,000/-
Ex.A7. Photo Copy of Cheque issued by OP for Rs.20,000/-
dt.10-11-08.
Ex.A8. Office Copy of Legal Notice of the Complainant to the Op dt.13-05-09.
Ex.A9. Postal Acknowledgement.
Ex.A10. Photo Copy of FIR dt.15-10-09 Banashankari P.S.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:
Ex.B1. Photo copy of Registration Certificate.
Ex.B2. Photo copy of Seminar Broacher.
Ex.B3. Photo copy of Industrial tour invitation for NDTV talk show.
Ex.B4 Photo copy of Letter of OMAX Autos Ltd.,
Ex.B5 Photo copy of Letter of Indus dt.04-03-2008
Ex.B6 Photo copy of Letter of Jognic’s dt.17-11-2007.
Ex.B7 Photo copy of Letter of RAPSRI dt. 31-10-2007.
Ex.B8 Photo copy of letter of Indus dt.14-11-2007.
Ex.B9 Photo copy of Letter of SPM India Ltd., dt.2-11-2007.
Ex.B10 Photo copy of E-mail letter from sujendra G.Satyendra dt.12-12-2008.
Ex.B11 Photo copy of List of Programme-1 dt.28-8-2008.
Ex.B12 Photo copy of List of participates in industrial visit. Dt.05-12-2008.
Ex.B13 Photo copy of Acknowledgement for Original certificates dt.22-8-08.
Ex.B14 Photo copy of letter of complainant dt. 30-10-2008.
Ex.B15 Photo copy of Acknowledgement for Original certificates dt.22-08-08.
Ex.B16 Photo copy of letter of complainant dt. 07-11-2008.
Ex.B17 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B18 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B19 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B20 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B21 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B22 Photo copy of Letter of complaint dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B23 Photo copy of Payment voucher for Rs.20,000/-
dt.07-11-2008.
Ex.B24 Photo copy of Course Broacher of OP.
Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on:
