DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No.365/2011
Ms. Sweekriti Bhatia
D/o Mr. Umesh Bhatia
R/o H-72, South Extension Part-1
New Delhi-110049 ….Complainant
Versus
1. FIITJEE Limited
FIITJEE House
29-A, Kalu Sarai,
Sarvapriya Vihar,
New Delhi-110016
2. The Director
FIITJEE Limited
FIITJEE (Delhi) South Centre
FIITJEE House
29-A, Kalu Sarai,
Sarvapriya Vihar,
New Delhi-110016
3. The Senior Manager –Admission
FIITJEE Limited
FIITJEE (Delhi) South Centre
FIITJEE House
29-A, Kalu Sarai,
Sarvapriya Vihar,
New Delhi-110016 ….Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 29.09.11 Date of Order : 11.04.18
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
ORDER
Case of the complainant, in nutshell, is that the complainant after passing an entrance examination held by the OPs got admission in the OP No.1 institute for ‘2 Year Classroom Programme for IIT JEE Weekend Contract Classes’ commencing on 08.05.10. It is stated that on 05.05.10 the complainant deposited fee amounting to Rs.1,23,092/- and was allotted enrollment No.1152111020421 vide receipt No.11/Course Fee/1011/B0465 issued by OP No.1. It is submitted that the complainant was compelled to purchase the specially prepared books and study material priced at Rs.11,000/-. The complainant joined the course on 08.05.10 and she observed that the quality of education being imparted and the quality of the study material was not as per the standard claimed by the OPs but the OPs did not pay any heed. The complainant sent a written representation that the services provided by the OPs were not satisfactory and requested to refund the balance fee on 03.04.11. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 13.07.11 to the OPs demanding refund of Rs.61546/- but no response was received from the OPs.
Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OPs the complainant has filed the present complaint for the following prayers:-
- Direct the OPs to refund of fee of Rs.61,546/- paid by the complainant being the advance fee paid for the period for which no service has been availed by the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% w.e.f. 08.05.11 till the date of realization;
- Direct the OP to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation towards mental pain and agony.
OPs in the written statement have inter-alia stated that the student seeking admission is based on the marks obtained in the admission test conducted by the OPs. Only few students qualify their admission test. Each student who wants to take admission test is required to fill registration form and at the time of registration the OPs provide the details of programme and suggestion in clean and clear manner. Reliance has been placed on Paras 6, 7, 12, 17 & 18 of the relevant declarations in the Enrolment Form, which read as under:
“Para 6: I understood that if I leave the institute before completing the full course for any reason whatsoever, including transfer of parents/guardians/ill health of self or any other member of the family or my admission in any institute/engineering college etc., or my studentship is cancelled because of misconduct etc. I or my parents/guardian shall have no claim for refund of fees.
Para 7: In addition to the above, I understand without any ambiguity that the fee once paid is not refundable at all, whatever the reasons be nor is it adjustable towards any other existing courses at FIIT JEE or any yet to be launched nor towards any other existing or prospective student.”
Para 12: I promise to abide by all rules and regulations of FIIT JEE declaration, in the letter and spirit.
Para 17 I/We, the parent/guardian and/or the student, severally and jointly declare that I/We have read and understood at all clauses contained in the Declaration on Enrolment Form and agree to abide by them without any reservation or ambiguity.
Para 18 I/We further declare that the above named student is taking admission in the FIIT JEE having considered everything material. On his own sweet will after giving due consideration to rigours of time, distance and studies ahead and with the permission of the parent/guardian without any coercion from any side.
It is stated that after perusing these declarations and the consent accorded thereto by the complainant and her guardian, it is crystal clear that the present complaint has been filed with utmost dishonest and malafide intentions. It is denied that the complainant was induced and compelled by the OPs to take the study material as she was made clear at the time of taking the admission that the study material will be required for successful completion of the course. The complainant could not cope up with the pattern and for circumventing the repercussions her own fault and careless attitude raised the finger on the competency of the faculty and also alleged some other irregularities which were not based on the material evidence in any form. It is submitted that as per the policy no new student was admitted in the batch in the place of the complainant who left the course midway. Other averments made in the complaint are denied. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder to the written statement reiterating the averments made in the complaint.
Complainant has filed her own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Ashish Kr. Aggarwal, Sr. Manager HRD has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OPs.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also carefully gone through the record.
Nowhere in the reply the OPs have stated that it is not an educational institution nor has this fact been stated in the affidavit of the OP’s witness.
The copy of the Enrolment Form of the complainant is filed by the OP as Ex. OP-W-II. It contains the important information for the students/Parents/Local Guardians. It also contains the above reproduced declarations. The Enrolment Form has been signed by the complainant and her father. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the complainant is bound by the terms and conditions contained in the Enrolment Form. This case is squarely covered by the judgment of National Commission in FIIT JEE Ltd. Vs. Harish Soni in RP No. 2054 of 2013 decided on 8.10.15. Moreover, para 6 of the affidavit of OPs’ witness reads as under:-
“6. I say that Opposite Party to ensure quality education and uniform teaching standard and also keeping in mind the student interest does not fill the vacancy created against any student who leave the course midway. No new student has been introduced in the batch.”
There is no evidence to rebut this fact. Thus, we are not inclined to believe that the seat vacated by the complainant was not filled by the OPs. If it is so, the complainant is not entitled to claim the amount of fee.
In view of the above discussion, we dismiss the complaint leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 11.04.2018
