BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, REWARI.
Consumer Complaint No: 24 of 2012.
Date of Institution: 10.01.2012.
Date of Decision : 25.03.2015.
Pushkar son of Shri Subhash Chand, resident of H.No.1179, sector-4, Rewari, Tehsil and Distt. Rewari.
…….Complainant.
Versus
- Kishan Lal Public College, Rewari,
- The Principal Shri P.K. Bansal , KLP College, Rewari.
…...Opposite Parties.
Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act
Before: Shri Raj Kumar ………. …..………..PRESIDENT
Shri Kapil Dev Sharma…………………MEMBER
Present : Complainant in person.
Shri R.K.Gera, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
Per Raj Kumar President
Factual matrix comprising the case of the complainant, shorn of details, is that the complainant took admission in BBE course in KLP college on 14.7.2011 and deposited Rs. 15,300/-. It is alleged by him that at the time of taking the admission, his result from Haryana State Counseling for B.Tech was awaited. It is also averred that the result was declared on 28.7.2011
and since he was allotted one seat in GITM, he immediately applied for cancellation of his admission on 1.8.2011 in the college of the opposite party and thus requested for the refund of the fees but the opposite party refused to do so; hence this compliant.
2) In reply, all the contents have been denied alleging that for any claim of damage, the complainant has to show that there was negligence on the part of the opposite party under the Act.
3) We have heard both the parties and gone through the record of the case available on the file thoroughly.
4) The contention of the complainant is that he did not attend the course nor any lecture of BBE course was attended by him and the admissions were still going on. No loss has occurred to the college due to his cancellation of admission. The complainant has every right to get his admission cancelled and is also entitled to refund of the fee. The contention of opposite party is that to get relief under Consumer Protection Act , the complainant has to show negligence on the part of the opposite party in providing service. The complainant has not come to the court with clean hands and has suppressed the material facts and has indulged in unnecessary litigation. From the pleadings, it is not disputed that the complainant has deposited admission fee of Rs. 15,300/- vide receipt Ex. C-2 on 14.7.2011. During the course of arguments, a copy of application form placed on the file as Ex. C-1 shows that the complainant moved an application dated 14.7.2011 to the opposite party for admission to the sessions 2011-12 . The complainant had signed the declaration while taking admission that his admission was provisional and will be
subject to confirmation of the university and in case his admission is canceled, he shall have no claim for refund of fee paid by him to the college. This application which is signed by the candidate himself will bind the complainant and now he is estopped from his act and conduct to riggel out of the same. A perusal of record also goes to show that the applicant has not come with cleans hands. He has suppressed the material facts regarding his attendance. He states that he has not attended even a single class but a perusal of the attendance register produced by the opposite party Ex. OP-6 goes to show that he had attended the college for about two months. On this ground also, he is not entitled to claim the relief.
5) In view of the above discussion and for the foregoing reasons, the complaint deserves dismissal and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Ordered accordingly.
Announced
25.3.2015.
President,
Distt. Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Rewari.
Member,
DCDRF,Rewari.
