Delhi

East Delhi

CC/295/2014

AKASH GARG - Complainant(s)

Versus

FITT ZEE - Opp.Party(s)

23 Feb 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 295/14

Sh. AKASH GARG

S/O Sh. DINESH GARG

R/O F-90, DILSHAD COLONY

DELHI 110095

THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED ATTORNEY

MR. DINESH GARG

•  

 

Vs

 

 

1. FIIT JEE Ltd.

THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

FIITJEE HOUSE, 29-A, KALU SARAI, SARVAPRIYA VIHAR

(NEAR HAUZ KHAS BUS TERMINAL),

NEW DELHI-110016

2. FIIT DELHI (EAST) CENTRE

THROUGH ITS CENTRE HEAD

5.  

DISTRICT CENTRE, LAXMI NAGAR

NEW DELHI-110092                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ….Opponents

Date of Institution: 25.03.2014

Judgment Reserved for: 23.02.2017

Judgment Passed on: 28.02.2017

CORUM:

Sh. SUKHDEV SINGH                  (PRESIDENT)

Dr. P.N. TIWARI                          (MEMBER

Ms. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

ORDER BY: MS. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

JUDGEMENT

1. This complaint pertains to allegations of deficiency in service by the complainant         Shri Akash Garg against OP-1-FIITJEE Ltd. and OP-2, FIIT Delhi (East) Centre.
2. Facts briefly stated are that the complainant joined two year integrated school program, Pinnacle, 2015 and paid Rs.97,999/- through two demand drafts bearing no. 740337, dated 26/11/2012 for 21,100/- and DD No. 740338 dated 26/11/2012 for Rs.76,899/-. Classes for the said program were to commence from 30/04/2013. The complainant attended only two classes on 30/04/2013 and 01/05/2015, which were totally different from the three demo classes given by OP. It is stated in the complaint that complainant was unable to cope with the stress and class culture, and was told by the trainers to change the stream. He discontinued attending classes. Letters dated 03/05/2013 & 14/05/2013 seeking refund of the fees were written by the parents of the complainant. On 20/07/2013, OP in their reply refused to refund the fees. Feeling aggrieved by the conduct of the OP, the complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.97,999/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from 01/05/2013 till realization, Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. Fees payment plan, goal sheet of the complainant, copy of Demand Drafts bearing No. 740337 and 740338 for Rs. 21,100/- and Rs.76,899/- respectively, requests for refund of fees vide letters dated 03/05/2013 and 14/05/2013, Mark sheet of the complainant for CBSE Class X, Passbook and reply dated 20/07/2013 of OP and I Card of OP are annexed with the complaint.
4. Reply was filed by OP, where it was stated that OP was a limited company incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act & engaged in business of imparting education to the students aspiring for IITs. It was stated that no deficiency in services could be attributed to the OPs as the complainant had voluntarily withdrawn from the course and the complainant was bound by the terms & conditions of the enrolment form to which the complainant & his father had consented. It was admitted that the complainant was enrolled with OP with grant of 90% scholarship in tuition fees & 100% scholarship in examination fee. It was further stated that to ensure quality education & uniform teaching standard. OP does not fill the vacancy created against any student who leaves the course midway. It was further stated that the classes had commenced from 17/04/2014 to 27/07/2014. Reference was made to attendance sheet which was not annexed with the reply. Rest of the contents of the complaint were denied. OP has annexed enrolment form of the complaint, enrolment contract, hall ticket cum fee receipt, FIITJEE Result Page with their reply. 
5. Thereafter Rejoinder to reply of the OP was filed by the complainant. It was denied that the complainant had attended classes on 17/04/2013 and dates mentioned in the complaint were reiterated. It was stated that the complainant has changed his stream from PCM to Commerce, thus the refund should be given to them.
6. Complainant examined himself and exhibited the affidavit as EX. CW1/1 and relied on EX. CW1/A- copy of fees, Ex. CW1/B and Ex. CW1/C are the demand drafts. Ex/CW1/D is the copy of letter for refund, Ex. CW1/E is letter dated 14/05/2013, OPs reply dated 20/07/2013 is Ex.Cw1/F.
7. Affidavit of Shri Ashish Kumar Aggarwal, Authorised Representative of OP was filed as evidence, reliance was placed on Ex OPW-1- Board resolution, Ex.OPW-II is copy of Enrolment form, copy of attendance sheet is Ex OPW-3 (colly)
8. We have heard the arguments addressed by the father of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP and have perused the documents placed on record. It is admitted that the complainant had joined two years integrated school program for IIT-JEE 2015 for which the complainant had paid Rs.97,999/- for one year. It is also admitted that the complainant had attended two classes. In the complaint and letters annexed with it, the complainant has stated that he could not take the stress and could not cope with the burden of studies, apart from that the complainant has changed his stream from PCM to commerce. Thus, no deficiency in services can be attributed on the part of OP, who is still willing to provide services to the complainant.

Hence the present complaint is dismissed being devoid of merits without order to any cost.

Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

 

(Dr. P.N. TIWARI)                                                                     (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)              

        MEMBER                                                                                            MEMBER

 

                                                (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                                           PRESIDENT