| First Appeal No. A/149/2020 | | ( Date of Filing : 15 Feb 2020 ) | | (Arisen out of Order Dated 16/01/2020 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/179/2018 of District Mysore) |
| | | | 1. Pramathi Hill View School | | Udayaravi road, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-570023 Rep. by its Principal C.S.Sudharshan | | Mysore | | Karnataka |
| ...........Appellant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. Jayanth Rao.R.V. | | S/o Late Vishwanath Rao.M.R., Aged about 50 years, Sales Office,India Cement Pvt. Ltd., Diskha Shetty Manson, Ramavilas road, Mysuru-570024 | | Mysore | | Karnataka |
| ...........Respondent(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | Dated: 01.09.2023 ORDER BY Mr. K. B. SANGANNANAVAR: Pri. Dist. & Session Judge (R)- JUDICIAL MEMBER: - This is an appeal filed by OP in CC/179/2018 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysore aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2020. (The parties herein after will be referred as to their rank assigned by the Forum below).
- The Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order, appeal papers and heard.
- It is not in dispute that daughter of complainant was admitted to IX Standard for the academic year 2016-17 by paying Rs.35,000/- on 01.04.2017, Rs.33,000/- on 24.04.2017 and Rs.6,170/- towards dress and in all Rs.74,170/- was paid, which in fact is not disputed by the OP before the Forum below.
- The daughter of complainant had attended the class for a day and their after discontinued her education on personal grounds which was explained to OP and in such circumstances complainant had requested OP for return of Rs.74,170/- paid by him, however OP retuned only Rs.33,000/- and withheld remaining amount.
- In the above such circumstances, a Consumer Complaint came to be raised by the complainant and the OP put his appearance through counsel had contested the complaint, contending that the complaint is not maintainable and he is not entitled for reliefs. In view of rival contentions of the parties to the case the Forum below held an enquiry, allowed the complaint in part and directed OP to pay Rs.35,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 10% p.a. from 01.06.2017 and pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization and it is this order being assailed in this appeal contending that the impugned order is bad in law, is not sustainable and the Forum below wrongly recorded finding ignoring the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and Hon’ble NCDRC and would submit Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain such complaint.
- Let us examine the impugned order, wherein could see the Forum below found OP has not produced admission register extract to show that after withdrawal of the complainant’s daughter’s seat from OP, was kept vacant for the academic year 2016-17. It is to be noted herein that OP had refunded portion of tuition fee and withheld remaining amount give rise to the forum below that the said seat was filled up with some other candidate. According to OP/appellant, complainant had voluntarily contributed some amount towards corpus fund of the school which is not refundable. According to OP such contribution was Rs.35,000/- and it was paid by father of complainant as a contribution to their trust which could be acceptable had the daughter of complainant continued her education in the said school at least for a term and got it transferred to some other school but facts remain she had attended classes for a day and discontinued which was immediate reported and sought for refund as such contentions that it was paid voluntarily is unacceptable. In such circumstances in our view, the Forum below has right in recording such findings and rightly excluded to refund Rs.6,170/- paid by complainant towards uniform to her daughter and refunded the remaining amount. In so far as contention of OP appellant that the Consumer Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint is not accepted and the Forum below has rightly entertained the complaint appreciating the facts placed before it in right perception and rightly recorded findings before reaching to such conclusion.
- In the above such circumstances, in our view considering the fact that the school is run by trust, it would be just and proper for the Commission to modify the impugned order suitably to meet ends of justice. Accordingly, allowed the appeal in part and directed OP to refund Rs.30,000/- along with interest @ 06% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization and do pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses within 45 days from the date of complaint till its payment failing which, such amount shall carry interest @ 09% p.a. from such default date
- The amount in deposit is directed to be transfer to Commission below for needful.
- Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the appeal.
Lady Member Judicial Member *GGH* | |
