DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.371/2012
Sh. Vibhav Prateek Srivastava
S/o Shri V. K. Srivastava
R/o C-72, GH-72, Oasis CGHS,
Sector-55, Gurgaon-122003 ….Complainant
Versus
FIIT JEE Ltd.
FIIT JEE House, 29-A, Kalu Sarai,
Sarvapriya Vihar,
New Delhi-110019 ……Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 21.07.12 Date of Order : 22.10.16
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
O R D E R
Briefly stated the case of the Complainant is that after finishing two years Pinnacle Programme, he took admission in 1 year Extended Classroom Programme Regular week contact class vide Enroll N. 1351111120283 on 16.06.11 and paid full and final fee including admission fee, examination fee, infrastructure fee, tuition fee and ITS + GMP + RTPF fee and service tax totaling to Rs.63,836/- through DD and PDC. With the hard study and regular attendance, he was able to get admission in IIT, Hyderabad and got his IIT JEE score at 208, i.e. above 200. As per terms and conditions of the OP, he was entitled to take back the amount from the above said fee after deducting Rs.13,000/- from it but till date no amount has been received from the OP. Accordingly, he wrote various letters and reminders dated 25.11.11, 27.12.11, 07.12.11, 24.08.11 and 01.12.12 but the OP did not release/refund a sum of Rs.50,836/-. Ultimately, he sent a legal notice dated 16.03.12 to the OP but to no avail. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of OP, the complaint has been filed for the following reliefs:-
- Direct the OP to pay/return to the Complainant a sum of Rs.50,836/- alongwith Rs.5500/- towards cost of legal notice,
- Direct the OP to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.1 lac as compensation for mental torture, agonies and damages caused to the Complainant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum from 16.06.11 till its realization.
In the written statement OP has inter-alia stated that the Complainant himself withdrew voluntarily from the course and the cheques given by him have also bounced i.e. the Complainant has not paid the major amount and he was a defaulter and he has not attached any document to support his claim. The Complainant had paid total amount of Rs.63836/- through DD and PDC cheque Nos.030509, 030512 & 030513 which have been returned un-paid with the comment “payment stopped by drawer”. It is stated as under:
“3 ……Further it is important to mention that no student left the course in midway except the son of the Complainant. It is submitted that the Complainant has filed the present Complaint in order to gain at the cost of the opposite parties.”
It is denied that as per their terms and conditions he was entitled to take back the amount from the fees after deducting Rs.13,000/-. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder to the written statement reiterating the averments made in the complaint. However, it is not specifically denied that the seat vacated by the Complainant has not been filled by the OP.
Complainant has filed his 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 OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments of behalf of the OP and carefully examined all the record placed before us.
Now, we straightway advert to the issue, whether the relief prayed for is admissible or not?
Having carefully examined the material placed before us we find that the complainant has himself stated in the complaint that after finishing two years Pinnacle Programme he got admission in one year extended classroom programme. The Complainant got admission in IIT Hyderabad after submitting the fees. The Complainant stopped the payment of three cheques amounting to Rs.19,855/-. According to the Complainant, as per terms and conditions of the OP, he was entitled to take back the amount from the above said fee after deducting Rs.13,000/- from it but till date no amount has been received from the OP but the Complainant has not filed any such document regarding terms and conditions on the record.
It is evident from the record that the Complainants paid Rs.63836/- through DD and the PDC cheques but after withdrawal of the admission the Complainant cancelled three PDC cheques issued in favour of the OP as he did not want to pursue the course.
The OP has cited latest judgement of National Commission dated 7.4.16 in the matter of FIIT JEE Ltd. Vs. Nitish Aggarwal in RP No. 3673 of 2013 wherein ratio-decidendi of the same Commission in the matter of FIIT JEE Ltd. Vs. Harish Soni, RP No. 2054 of 2013 has been held to be relevant to the present facts of the case wherein the complainant’s son had left the one year course midway. In the said judgment, the National Commission has inter-alia categorically held that “if a student leaves the course midway he would not be entitled to refund of money provided the seat has remained vacant”. Here the specific averment made by the OP that the seat vacated by a student in midway is not filled by OP has not been denied by the Complainant.
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 22.10.16
