Delhi

North East

RBT/CC/167/2024

ROHIT RAWAT - Complainant(s)

Versus

EXPERT INSTITUTE OF ADVANCE TECHNOLOGIES - Opp.Party(s)

23 Jul 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

RBT/Complaint Case No.167/24

In the matter of:

 

	Shri Rohit Rawat, Sh. Matwar Singh Rawat, R/o H.No. 390, Pandit Mohalla, Old Kondli, Kondli Mayur Vihar Ph-3, East Delhi 110096	Complainant
	Versus
1.       2.     3.	Expert Institute of Advance Technologies (Though its Director)   Sh. Sumit Mishra, (Through its Manager)   Ms. Shruti, (Through its Executive Manager) All at: 107, Third Floor, Kingsway Camp, Near Guru Tegh Bahadur Nagar Metro Station, Gate No. 1, New Delhi 110009	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                         DATE OF ORDER  :

30.01.2023 20.05.2024 23.07.2024

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Adarsh Nain, Member

ORDER

 

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainant

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that on 01.09.2022 he received a call from the Opposite Party No. 3 regarding the courses offered by the Opposite Party No. 1. Complainant stated that on the same day Opposite Party No. 3 made an offer to pursue the offline LCD/LED repairing course. Complainant stated that after discussion about the said course it was decided that duration of the said course would be three months.  The fee was settled as Rs. 12,000/-. Complainant stated that Opposite Parties had assured that after completion of the said course the Complainant would be offered a private job from the side of Opposite Parties and further directed to pay Rs. 500/- for attending the demo classes. Complainant stated that on the assurance of the Opposite Party No. 3 he paid an amount of Rs. 500/- through paytm/NEFT on 06.09.2022 and in this regard Opposite Parties also provided the original receipt of the said payment. Complainant stated that he made the full payment towards the completion of the course through online transfers. Complainant stated that Opposite Parties issued a list of services to be provided to him during and after the course but none of the services had been provided to the Complainant. Complainant stated that on request for the said online classes the Opposite Party directed to download the video from the institute Youtube channel and study the course. Complainant stated that after making the payment he went to the office of Opposite Parties for attending the course then Opposite Party denied for conducting the course and stated that no classes would be provided to him. Complainant stated that after four to five days he again went to the office of Opposite Party for attending the classes then concerned institute stated that there was a technical error for fifteen days and after completion of fifteen days the course would be pursued. Complainant stated that after fifteen days when he visited the office of Opposite Parties then they threatened him. Complainant stated that on 20.10.2022 he made several requests through phone calls and whatsapp messages to refund the payment but Opposite Parties denied the same. On 23.12.2022 he sent a legal demand notice to the Opposite Parties and on 28.12.2022 they sent their reply but they did not refund the amount. Hence, this shows the deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed to recover the amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- along with interest @ 24 % p.a. including mental harassment and litigation expenses.  

Ex- Parte Evidence of the Complainant

2. The Complainant in support of his case filed his affidavit wherein he has supported the assertions made in the complaint.

Arguments & Conclusion

3. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the Complainant. The case of the Complainant is that he was offered training course for repairing LCD/LED. As per the assurance given by the Opposite Parties, he deposited the required fee for attending the course. The case of the Complainant is that he was not given training by attending the classes despite his requests and visits to the Opposite Party No. 1 nor the Opposite Party No. 1 has refunded the fees deposited by the Complainant. The allegations of the Complainant have been supported by his affidavit and the copies of the whatsapp chat. From the evidence led by the Complainant it is proved that there was deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party No. 1 i.e. Expert Institute of Advance Technologies.
4. In view of the above, the complaint is allowed. The Opposite Party No. 1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 12,500/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till recovery. The Opposite Party No. 1 shall also pay an amount of Rs. 30,000/- to the Complainant on account of mental harassment and litigation expenses along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of this order till recovery.

1. Order announced on 23.07.2024.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Adarsh Nain)		(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)		(President)