Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/292/2017

Chitkara University - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kunal Thakur - Opp.Party(s)

30 Nov 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

                                                                 

Appeal No.	:	292 of 2017
Date of Institution	:	28.11.2017
Date of Decision	:	30.11.2017

 

Chitkara University having its Administrative Office at Saraswati Kendra, SCO 160-161, Sector 9, Chandigarh, through its Registrar.

……Appellant/Opposite Party.

Versus

Kunal Thakur s/o Rajesh Kumar R/o H.No.2272-C, Sector 63, Chandigarh – 160047.

….Respondent/Complainant.

BEFORE:   JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT.

                SH. DEV RAJ, MEMBER.

                SMT.PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER.

 

Argued by:

Sh. Dinesh Arora, Advocate for the appellant/Opposite Party.

 

PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD), PRESIDENT

 

(ORAL)

                   The appellant/Opposite Party has filed this appeal against order dated 02.11.2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, UT, Chandigarh (in short “the Forum” only) in Consumer Complaint No.602/2017, allowing the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant.

2.         In the said complaint, it was grievance of the complainant that part of the payment made was not refunded to him, despite making requests. The Forum by taking note of fee refund rules, held as a matter of fact that an amount of Rs.13,000/- was not refunded to the complainant, without any justification. When the complainant opted for refund, he was returned only an amount of Rs.76,500/- and part of amount paid was wrongly retained. By noting as above, the following relief was granted to the respondent/complainant :-

“6.In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The opposite parties are directed as under ;-

1. To refund Rs.13,000/-  to the complainant with interest @ 9% p.a. from 08.12.2016 (i.e. when the OP refunded a sum of Rs.76,500/- to him), till its realization.
2. To pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment.
3. To pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.

This order be complied with by the Opposite Parties, within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the amount at Sr.No. (ii) shall also carry interest @9% per annum from the date of this order till its realization besides compliance of directions as mentioned at Sr.No.(i) and (iii).”

3.         At the time of arguments, on our asking, Counsel for the appellant/Opposite Party has failed to controvert the fact that amount ordered to be refunded was due. However, it was said that amount was not refunded on account of some confusion in understanding the rules.       By stating as above, prayer has been made to reverse the order under challenge.

4.         It is also on record that on the very first date of hearing, before the Forum, no reply was filed, rather it was said that the Opposite Party will pay the said amount. Today also, it was so said. The above fact clearly shows that the amount was wrongly retained.

5.         In view of above, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Forum is perfectly justified. No case is made out for interference.

6.         Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed, with no order as to costs and the impugned order is upheld.

7.         Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge.

8.         File be consigned to record room, after completion. 

 Pronounced

November 30, 2017.                                     

                       

[JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.)]

PRESIDENT

 

 

 

(DEV RAJ)

MEMBER 

 

 

 

(PADMA PANDEY)

      MEMBER

 

Rb/AD