(Per: Justice B.C. Kandpal, President):
This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 31.05.2014 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 225 of 2013. By the order impugned, the District Forum has allowed the consumer complaint and directed the appellant – opposite party No. 1 to pay compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- to the respondent No. 1 – complainant.
2
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that on 27.07.2011, the complainant had taken admission in the opposite party No. 1 – College in MBA (Master of Business Administration) course and deposited the fees of Rs. 1,22,000/-. It was alleged that the result of the complainant of BBA (Bachelor of Business Administration) course pertaining to sixth semester was declared belatedly and she was declared fail in Environmental Science and, as such, she was refused admission in the opposite party No. 1 – College. The complainant demanded refund of the fees deposited by her, but the College refused to refund the fees. Thereafter, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Haridwar.
3. The appellant – College filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that the consumer complaint is barred by time; that the complainant did not submit her original mark-sheet within the stipulated time; that the complainant herself did not come to the College and that there is no deficiency in service on their part.
4. The respondent No. 2 – University also filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that they have not provided any service to the complainant; that the complainant has not paid any consideration to the University; that the complainant was not enrolled with the University for Master of Business Administration first semester course and that they are not liable to pay any amount to the complainant.
5. The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint against the appellant vide
3
impugned order dated 31.05.2014 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
6. None appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2 – University. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant – College and the brother of respondent No. 1 – complainant and have also perused the record.
7. So far as the limitation aspect of the matter is concerned, the consumer complaint was filed by the complainant before the District Forum, Haridwar on 11.06.2013. The fees was deposited by the complainant with the appellant – College on 27.07.2011. The complainant has specifically stated that her result of BBA course sixth semester was declared late. The said contention of the complainant is proved by the affidavit submitted by the complainant before the appellant – College (Paper No. 28), wherein she has stated that her result is awaited and when the result was declared, she was declared fail in Environmental Science and was not eligible for MBA course, she applied for refund of the fees through different letters dated 04.11.2011, 26.09.2012 and 19.11.2012, as is stated in the replication filed by the complainant before the District Forum (Paper Nos. 22 to 24) and when the appellant – College denied the refund of the fees, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum. Therefore, it can not be said that the cause of action for filing the consumer complaint lastly accrued on 27.07.2011, when the complainant deposited the fees. Even otherwise, as is stated above, the fees was deposited on 27.07.2011 and the consumer complaint was filed on 11.06.2013, within a period of two years from the date of depositing the fees and hence that way also, it can not be said that the consumer complaint filed by the complainant was barred by time.
4
8. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainant had deposited sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- with the appellant – College towards fees. There is also no dispute with regard to the fact that the complainant was granted admission in the appellant – College. The appellant – College has stated that as the complainant did not submit her mark-sheet and, as such, she was not entitled to be enrolled in the College and granted admission.
9. When the complainant was not eligible for getting admission in MBA course in the appellant – College, there was no justification on the part of the appellant – College to unnecessarily and without any cogent reason withhold the refund of the fees. The fees was even not refunded even after repeated letters by the complainant. Thus, there has been clear-cut deficiency in service on the part of the appellant – College in not refunding the fees of the complainant. The District Forum has rightly directed for refund of the fees of Rs. 1,22,000/- and has also awarded sum of Rs. 3,000/-, which can not be said to be on the higher side.
10. The District Forum has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case and has passed a reasoned order, which does not call for any interference and the appeal being devoid of any merit, is liable to be dismissed.
11. For the reasons aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(D.K. TYAGI) (JUSTICE B.C. KANDPAL)
K