In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4^th Floor, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.445/2012.

1)                   Sri Rabindranath Choudhury,

            25, Jadav Das Lane, Shibpur,

            P.S. Shibpur, Howrah, Pin-711102.                                                         ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   Dr. Sumanta Gupta,

            Director, Vinayaka Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.

            59, JodhpurGarden, Prince Anwar Shah Road,

            P.S. Lake,  Kolkata-45   and residing at

            D/08/14, Ashabari, Uttarayan Complex,

            P.O. Matigara, Dist. Darjeeling, Pin-734010.                                            ---------- Opposite Party

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Smt.  Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

Order No.   23    Dated  24-10-2013.

          We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainant is a retired employee of United Bank of India (senior citizen) and intended to admit his son Sri Soumik Choudhury for MBBS course in the academic session 2009-2010.

            O.p. runs a business of consultancy under the name and style “Vinayaka Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.” who published advertisement in a daily news paper and as well as in the pamphlet declaring him as consulting agent of Adichunchangiri Institute of Medical Science (AIMS)  B.G. Nagara, Bellur, Dist.Mandya, Karnataka-571448 and also offering service to make arrangement for admission in private medical college, out side West Bengal under management quota.

            In response to the said advertisement complainant contacted office of o.p. on or about 11.7.09. O.p. demanded total Rs.24 lakhs towards admission charges (package) for the entire course including his service charges. O.p. also gave break up of the amount in a paper. As per demand of o.p. the complainant paid total Rs.17 lakhs to o.p. by cash and cheque as 28.7.09, 8.9.09, 19.9.09, 6,10,09 and 9.10.09 respectively. O.p. did not issue any receipt for the same except for Rs.4 lakhs paid on 9.10.09 by bearer cheque of UBI, Royal Exchange Branch, Kolkata.

            After payment of the said sum of to o.p. the son of complainant was admitted in AIMS, B.G. Nagara, Dist. Mandya, Karnataka-571448 in the 1^st year MBBS course in 2009-10 academic session. O.p. willfully and deliberately failed to pay required amount of  1^st instalment by 1.2.10 to AIMS and for the said default of payment complainant’s son was not allowed to sit for the 1^st year final examination. Consequently, complainant’s son had to loose one academic year in his carrier. O.p. did not pay any further required amount to AIMS although he received total Rs.17 lakhs for payment to AIMS.             Thereafter, the cheque deposited by o.p. for 1^st instalment to the AIMS was dishonoured.

            On 6.10.09 on demand of o.p. complainant paid cash Rs.4 lakhs for payment to AIMS and he issued a receipt. But O.p. did not pay the said amount to the AIMS. On demand o.p. issued a cheque no.055430 dt.20.9.10 towards refund of Rs.2,20,000/- in respect of payment of 1^st instalment to AIMS. But the said cheque was dishonoured. Complainant requested the o.p. for refund of the said amount in several times, but no result.

            On 26.10.10 o.p. in his letter head pad issued one acknowledgement assuring that he would refund the said amount of Rs.8.50 lakhs on 1.12.12, 1.4.11 and 1.12.11 respectively as per payment schedule of the college, but finally o.p. did not refund the same. Complainant sent a demand notice to o.p. through his advocate on 1.12.10 claiming refund of Rs.2.20 lakhs with interest. But o.p. did not pay any heed to it.

            In response to the advertisement and acting on the representations and instructions given by o.p. the complainant hired the service of o.p. for making arrangement for admission of his son in MBBS course in AIMS, Bellur, B.G. Nagara, Dist. Mandya, Karnataka-571448 in 2009-10 session and for payment of required amount to AIMS as per payment schedule and for that purpose the complainant paid to o.p. total Rs.17 lakhs including his service charges. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

            O.p. did not contest the case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against the o.p.  

Decision with reasons:

            In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that the complainant has substantiated to prove his case and o.p. had sufficient deficiency in service on its part being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the case is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.p. O.p. is directed to refund a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees seventeen lakhs) only which the complainant paid to o.p. and is further directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.