BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 83 of 2013
Date of Institution : 28.3.2013
Date of Decision : 20.9.2016
Arun Kumar aged about 22 years son of Shri Ramesh Kumar Pareek, resident of village Jandwala Baggar, Tehsil and District Fatehabad.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Kamboj Institute of Education, Gali Beauti Tailor Wali, Near Gandhi Chowk, Ellenabad, District Sirsa through its Director Saminder Pal.
2. Shaminder Pal, Director, Kamboj Institute of Education, Gali Beauti Tailor Wali, Near Gandhi Chowk, Ellenabad, District Sirsa, resident of village Dhani Mouji Ki Dhani, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA……………………….PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL……MEMBER.
Present: Sh.J.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Vinod Kamboj, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
In brief the case of the complainant is that complainant has applied for J.B.T. course to opposite party no.1 where the op no.2 is the Director/ Principal of the above said institute. The op no.2 allured the complainant that he is eligible for giving decree of Junior Basic Teacher. The complainant applied for admission for the Sessions 2009 to 2011 to the opposite parties and deposited Rs.15,000/- as fee vide receipt No.0325 dated 6.8.2010 and ops got admitted him and started giving coaching to him. The complainant attended the classes under op no.1 regularly as per their assurances. Thereafter, the op no.1 assured for the examination of the complainant that same will be conducted in April, 2010 but he did not conduct the said examination and stated that their examination has already been postponed and will be conducted in the month of December, 2010. But in the month of December, 2010 he again stated that their examination will be conducted in the month of April, 2011 but no examination were conducted by the opposite parties whereas the complainant attended classes regularly and was hard working for the examination. Then op no.2 assured that examination will be conducted jointly and thereafter complainant will get degree. In the month of May, 2011, the op no.2 asked the complainant to deposit remaining fee of Rs.25,000/- because the examination will be conducted in June, 2011. Then the complainant deposited Rs.15,000/- in cash and stated that he will pay Rs.10,000/- after some time, but op no.2 declared that if does not deposit Rs.10,000/-, he will not be able to appear in the examination. So complainant deposited Rs.10,000/- in the account No.31252659953 of the ops on 1.5.2011. But inspite of it, in the month of June, 2011, no examinations were conducted and op no.2 time and again assured for examination in April, 2012 but all in vain. The opposite parties have failed to conduct examination during the last two years despite assurances and defrauded the complainant and due to this reason his career has been completely spoiled. Hence, the present complaint for a direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs.40,000/- alongwith interest @2% per month from due date and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and also litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the case by filing written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability; cause of action and locus standi and cause of action and that this Forum has no jurisdiction as complainant has impleaded the Director of the College as party and did not implead the College office which is situated at Jammu and as such complaint is technically defective and is liable to be dismissed on this score alone. On merits, it has been submitted that the role and participation of the replying ops in the admission got by the complainant from ops does not arise at all. The answering op is running the Coaching Centre for the different courses including the J.B.T and besides this the replying op has no role or the involvement in the admission taken by the student from any Educational College. The answering op never allured the complainant for any admission either with op no.2 or with any other Educational College for the admission of JBT course. The contents of para no.2 of the complaint with regard to the fee for the education for the period w.e.f. 2009 to 2011 are also wrong and incorrect and denied. The answering op has no role or the participation in the deposit or non deposit of the admission fee by any student as the responsibility of the op is only to provide the coaching to the students doing the different courses in the Education field. The whole of the case of the complainant is based on the dispute regarding non-admission and examination of the complainant for the IInd year of the complainant. The complainant never attended the class for Ist year with the answsering op in the capacity as College class rather he has only approached the op in the capacity of student of coaching class and complainant settled the fee for the coaching of JBT 1st year and IInd year as Rs.25,000/- and the complainant inspite of taking the coaching for 1st year failed to deposit the fee of 1st year. In fact the ops reserve their right to recover the amount of Rs.25,000/- from the complainant as they never committed any default in their coaching proceedings and op is still ready to provide the coaching of IInd year. The remaining contents of the complaint have also been denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint has been made.
3. The complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of receipt No.0325 dated 6.8.2010 for an amount of Rs.15,000/- Ex.C1, copy of slip regarding deposit of Rs.10,000/- as Ex.C2. On the other hand, opposite parties have tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. There is nothing on file to show that opposite parties undertake to give degree of Junior Basic Teacher. The complainant has not placed on file any prospectus or any document of the opposite parties that their institute gives admission to the students for doing the course of Junior Basic Teacher and also gives degrees in this regard to the students. The opposite parties have pleaded that their institute only provides coaching for the different courses including J.B.T course and the complainant took the admission for JBT course in the Educational College of JBT having its office at Jammu but said Educational College has not been impleaded as a party. The complainant has also not placed on file anything to show that there is any tie-up between the opposite parties and the college at Jammu and any connection between them for granting admissions to the students and conducting the said course to the students. So, we find no merit in the present complaint against the opposite parties. Resultantly, the complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:20.9.2016 District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
Member.
