BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

11^th DAY OF JUNE 2015

               PRESENT:- SRI. J.N.HAVANUR                  PRESIDENT

                                SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA        MEMBER                                                         

                  O R D E R

SRI. J.N. HAVANUR, PRESIDENT              

This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the OP Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, praying to pass an order directing the OP to make payment of Rs.63,000/- along with 21% interest and to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages suffered by the complainant and his son and cost of litigation.

2. The brief facts of the complaint can be stated as under:

The complainant had come in association with the OP Institution in the month of January 2013 for the purpose of getting his son Master Pulkit and admitted to OP Institution.  The OP is an Institution which has been specially set up for the purpose of imparting education to children with learning disabilities.  OP had admitted the son of the complainant only after conducting a thorough assessment of child and on pre condition that the complainant agrees to pay the donation amounting to Rs.50,000/- in 3 instalments and part of amount i.e., Rs.35,000/- was paid by the complainant in 2 instalments along with monthly fees of Rs.4,000/-.  Even though the amount of donation was exorbitant the complainant agreed to pay the same under protest as he had a higher responsibility towards educating his son and requested OP to allow him to pay the same in 3 instalments and OP agreed to the same at the time of admission, when complainant’s wife had gone to pay the second instalment, the secretary of OP affronted and insulted her and demanded the entire amount to be paid immediately at one go, contrary to the previously agreed arrangement, demeaning the integrity of the complainant and his wife.  Even after collecting more than half of the donation amount and date of paying the balance not being due yet, staff members of OP started harassing the complainant to make good the balance sum of Rs.15,000/- to such an extent that apart from sending notes to the complainant through his son, the OP also made numerous calls to the complainant’s wife during working hours, demanding and threatening that if the balance donation amount is not paid the complainant’s son will not be allowed to take up the exam.  On 25.07.2013 when complainant’s son was entering to school premises, he was stopped by some staff members of OP and started demanding money from the helpless child and he was not allowed to enter class and instead was made to call home to inform the complainant to pay the balance donation amount immediately and that only after this amount was paid the complainant’s son would be allowed to resume attending classes.  It was only after the complainant’s wife threatened to take legal action against OP for the torturous acts and the child was retained in the school for that day.  However, due to extreme mental harassment suffered by the complainant’s family especially his son, the complainant decided to stop sending the child to school from the very next day in the best interest of the child.  The OP has improperly been collecting tuition fees for 12 months whereas all other institutions collect tuition fees for 11 months.  OP has collected a sum of Rs.4,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of computer usage which is entirely arbitrary as the complainant’s son was stopped to use the computer only for a short period till the month of October 2013.  Moreover less than a dozen note books and dairy, amounting to high as Rs.1,000/- was forcefully issued to complainant’s son.  OP has not only mentally harassed the complainant and his wife but also their child Master Pulkit who was put under the care and vigilance of OP, trusting that their Institution which is specially set up for imparting education to children with learning disabilities would take special care of their child.  Due to differential treatment meted out to the complainant’s son in school and during class hours in front of other children for not having paid the entire amount of donation, the complainant’s son had begun to show withdrawal symptoms as the same has deeply affected his psyche.  An Institution such as the OP should have trained and skilled staff in order to look after the sensitive needs of such children rather than admonish them.  The said incidents have gravely and adversely impacted the sensitive mind of complainant’s son who is now unwilling to go back to any school after being at the receiving such outrageous behavior from OP, thereby jeopardizing his entire future.  It is appalling to see how an Institution like OP which is set up to assist children with learning disabilities in order to assimilate them into mainstream which claims to be ‘Child Centered’ would act in such a callous, unpleasant and insensitive manner.  The said act of OP amounts to veiled extortion from innocent parents who desire good quality education for their children.  OP has restrained the complainant’s son from attending classes and it is only fair that the money paid as fees and donation be returned to complainant.  The complainant has sent numerous letters to OP seeking for refund of Rs.63,000/- which includes a sum of Rs.35,000/- towards donation amount, a sum of Rs.24,000/- i.e., a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month having been paid towards the tuition fee from the month of January 2013 to June 2013.  Despite repeated requests and reminders OP has failed and neglected to pay the amount.  Thereafter, complainant got issued a letter dated 24.07.2013 and it is replied by OP.  Notice is also sent on 04.10.2013 and that notice was replied by OP.  So the complainant has come up with present complaint.    

3. After service of the notice, Secretary of OP appeared and filed version contending interalia as under:

The complaint of complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts.  All the allegations made by the complainant are hereby denied as false, fictitious, frivolous, vexatious, malicious and misleading.  Child Master Pulkit Parashar was given admission after assessment of the child by Dr.Anuradha Kabra Consultant Clinical Psychologist and report of the doctor was received by OP on 02.01.2013.  The child is reportedly mischievous, stubborn and demanding besides at times bullies children younger to him ad teases class mates and has wandering behavior, no guilt, stammering, clumsiness etc.  The child needed cognitive behavior therapy.  This is by no means an ordinary task.  It is true that complainant has paid Rs.28,000/- as monthly fee from 1^st January to July 2013 at Rs.4,000/- per month for the child Master Pulkit Parashar for 7 months.  The computer use is a part of education for the children.  The student has attended the classes and received the special education, attention and care and is treated on par with other similarly placed children needing special care and attention.  There is no discriminatory treatment to the child as it is done according to the assessed need of a child.  In fact for the disable children having Dyslexia and are slow learners etc., a different/special treatment which is a need of every child as the whole system and experimentation demands is child centric and situational has been in place.  It is unfortunate that the parents of Master Pulkit Parashar who could neither understand nor handle this own but unfortunately complain about this and make it an issue.  The whole issue is the child is not in its control always and monitoring is a must.  As the fees paid relates to the period of child attendance and complainant claim for refund of the same is illogical, illegal and cannot survive.  The parents have been repeatedly invited to the school for a composed and cool dialogue to sort out the issues which the complainant has brushed aside, threatened them verbally and has come before the Forum.  Both parents did not even bother to attend to school meetings held regularly for the benefit of child and parents have chosen to complaint before the Forum.  It is denied that school did not treat the child or the parents properly.  The demand for return of monthly fees of Rs.28,000/- paid from January to June 2013 is uncharitable, as the parents and the child have utilized the schooling facility during that period.  The complainant always spoke rubbish and used threatening tone on the phone to them from Chennai at even odd hours disturbing their normal after school hours family life and religious chores.  It would have been in fitness of things for them to give a police complaint against complainant for harassing and threatening them but they did not do so.  The claim of Rs.63,000/- is an imaginary amount and it is not supported by any facts or documents.  Teachers handling the class have reminded the defaulting parents to remit the monthly fees and this is a normal reminder, however the child Master Pulkit Parashar continued to get schooling facilities without making monthly fee payment.  Complainant who works in media or his employed wife, the monthly expenses of the school by OP remained streaming.  OP is not a charitable or free school and cannot afford such facility.  So she prays a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- may kindly be ordered to be paid by the complainant to OP.  There is no cause of action.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of OP.  So, OP prays to dismiss the complaint.

4. So from the averments of the complaint of the complainant and version of Opposite Party the following points arise for our consideration as under:

5. Our answer to the following points:

REASONS

6. So as to prove the case the complainant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and produced documents along with complaint.  On the other hand Mrs.Husna Fathima Rahaman who being secretary of OP has filed her affidavit and produced 11 documents.

7. Sri.Laxmikant Parashar, who being complainant has stated in his affidavit that he had come in association with the OP Institution in the month of January 2013 for the purpose of getting his son Master Pulkit and admitted to OP Institution.  The OP trust is an Institution which has been specially set up for the purpose of imparting education to children with learning disabilities.  The OP had admitted his son to school only after conducting a thorough assessment of child and on pre condition that he agreed to pay the donation amounting to Rs.50,000/- in 3 instalments.  He paid Rs.35,000/- in 2 instalments along with monthly fees of    Rs.4,000-00.  Though the amount of donation was exorbitant he agreed to pay the same under protest as he had a higher responsibility towards educating his son and requested OP to allow him to pay the same in 3 instalments.  OP has agreed to the same at the time of admission but when his wife has gone to pay the second instalment, the secretary of OP affronted and insulted her and demanded the entire amount to be paid immediately at one go, contrary to the previously agreed arrangement, demeaning the integrity.  Even after collecting more than half of the donation amount and date of paying the balance amount not being due yet, staff members of OP started harassing his wife to make good balance sum of Rs.15,000/- to such an extent that apart from sending notes to him through his son.  The OP has made a numerous calls to his wife during working hours, demanding and threatening that if balance donation amount is not paid his son will not be allowed to take up the exam.  It is significant to point out that on 25.07.2013 when his son was entering to school premises, he was stopped by some staff members of OP and started demanding money from the helpless child and he was not allowed to enter class and he was made to call home to inform his parents to pay the balance donation amount immediately i.e., a sum of Rs.15,000/- and only after this amount was paid his son would be allowed to resume attending classes.  It was only after his wife threatened to take legal action against OP for their torturous acts.  The child was retained in the school for that day and due to extreme mental harassment suffered by his family especially his son, he decided to stop sending the child to school for the very next day in the best interest of the child.  The OP has been collecting tuition fees improperly for 12 months whereas all the institutions collect tuition fees for 11 months only.  In fact OP has collected a sum of Rs.4,000/- from him on the pretext of computer usage which is entirely arbitrary as his son was supposed to use the computer only for a short period till the month of October 2013.  Moreover less than a dozen note books and dairy amounting to high as Rs.1,000/- was forcibly issued to his son.  OP has not only mentally harassed him and his wife but also their child who was put under care and vigilance of OP, trusting that OP Institution which is specially set up for imparting education to children with learning disabilities would take a special care of their child.  Due to different treatment meted out to his son in school and during class hours in front of other children for not having paid the entire amount of donation, his son had begun to show withdrawal symptoms as the same has deeply affected his psyche and due to that his son is now unwilling to go back to any school after being at the receiving end of such outrageous behavior from OP, thereby jeopardizing his entire future.  The said act of OP amounts to veiled extortion from innocent parents who desire good quality education for their children.  So he has sent a numerous letters to OP seeking for refund of Rs.63,000/- and Rs.4,000/- fees paid towards computer.  The receipt for donation collected was not issued by OP; however the OP has not denied the receipt of donation.  Thereafter, he got issued a letter to OP dated 24.07.2013.  A reply dated 31.08.2013 was issued by OP and in response to various correspondence made by him, OP got issued a notice dated 04.10.2013 rejecting his claim.  He thereby issued a reply but OP refused to reimburse the said amount.  So complaint be allowed and grant reliefs as prayed for.

8. Let us have a look at the relevant documents of the complainant.  Document No.1 is the fee account card of OP issued in the name of complainant’s son for having received Rs.4,000/- each from January to April.  Document No.1 consists of another documents dated 13.06.2013 issued by OP in the name of complainant’s son and that document shows that OP has collected Rs.8,000/- towards tuition fees, lab fees and special fees and that amount has been paid by mother of child.  Document No.1 consists of one more document dated 08.07.2013 sent by OP in the name of complainant for having collected Rs.4,000/-.  Document No.2 is letter of complainant issued to OP dated 24.08.2013 stating that his son has been harassed mentally by OP teachers are demanding child every day and insulting the child so requested OP to return the amount paid by him.  Document No.3 is the letter of OP dated 31.08.2013 addressed to complainant denying of notice of the complainant and called upon the complainant and his wife to come to institution and sort out all issues.  Document No.4 is the letter of complainant addressed to OP dated 24.09.2013 to return the amount.  Document No.5 is the letter of OP addressed to complainant stating that the balance of school fee be remitted for the months of August and September 2013.  Document No.6 is the legal notice of complainant addressed to OP to pay a sum of Rs.63,000/- within 15 days failing which complainant will take appropriate legal action.  The complainant has produced postal receipts and AD card.  The complainant has produced school dairy book wherein we found an endorsement by teacher addressed to parents please pay balance amount of admission Rs.15,000/- on 08.07.2013 and on 06.07.2013 it is mentioned to bring Rs.100/- and Rs.90/- for H.Sc papers and H.Sc Xerox notes.

9. Let us have cursory glance at the material evidence of OP.  Mrs.Husna Fathima Rahaman, who being secretary of OP has stated in her affidavit that the child Master Pulkit Parashar was given admission after assessment of the child by Dr.Anuradha Kabra and his report was received by them on 02.01.2013.  The child of complainant is mischievous; stubborn the child needed cognitive behavior therapy.  Complainant has paid Rs.28,000/- as monthly fee from 1^st January to July 2013.  There is no discriminatory treatment to the child of the complainant as it is done according to the assessed need of a child for the disabled children having Dyslexia and are slow learners etc., a differential/special treatment which is a need of every child and child is centric and situational has to be in place and it is unfortunate that the parents of Master Pulakit Parashar who could neither understand nor handle this on their own but uncomfortably complain about this and make it an issue.  The school, the teachers, the special educators and the aayaas who handle these children cannot slip their attention for even a fraction of time would keep an unremitting watch in the absence anything may happen and is possible.  The whole issue is that child is not in its control always and monitoring is a must.  As the fees paid relates to the period of child attendance and complainant claim for refund is illogical, illegal and cannot survive.  Both parents did not even bother to attend to school meetings held regularly.

 10. It is denied that school did not treat the child or the parents properly as it is unfounded and untrue.  The demand for return of monthly fees of Rs.28,000/- paid from January to June 2013 is uncharitable, as the parents and the child have utilized the school facility during that period and school has incurred expenses and in the form of payments for giving special education.  So the return of amount sought is untenable.  The complainant always spoke rubbish and used threatening tone on the phone.  It would have been the proper to give a police complaint against complainant for harassing and threatening and behaving indecently using the slang language but giving a long rope to complainant was bad decision on their part.  So they do not do so.  The claim of Rs.63,000/- is an imaginary amount not supported by any facts or documents.  The teachers handling the class have reminded the defaulting parents to remit the monthly fees.  The fee for the whole month of May 2013 was not paid by complainant but child was getting all the facilities.  They are not a charitable or free school and cannot afford such facility.  The complainant has come up false, fictitious and frivolous complaint.  So she prays for compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- from complainant.  Complainant prayed for such other reliefs deserves to be set aside.  So she prays to dismiss the complaint.

11. The OP has produced application form given by the complainant to OP dated 02.01.2013 for admission of his child.  Document No.2 is the Psychological Testing Report of child of complainant given by Dr.B.Kapur stating as below average.  Attendance register copy is produced wherein the name of complainant’s son is at serial number 40 of attendance register.  Document No.4 is the letter of complainant addressed to school of OP dated 24.08.2013 complaining that his son was mentally tortured by OP and its teachers by demanding money every day giving notes and assignments and expecting him to complete the same overnight and punishing him by writing the answer papers.  So prayed for return of Rs.65,000/- as he stopped sending his son to school.  Document No.5 is the letter of OP dated 31.08.2013 addressed to complainant calling upon him to come to their institution on any working day with prior appointment to sort out the issue and in the said reply letter the OP has not denied the harassment given to the complainant’s son by OP and his staff as stated in the letter of the complainant.  Document No.6 is the copy of letter of complainant addressed to OP dated 24.09.2013 praying to settle the matter by refunding the amount earliest and do not force him to take legation action.  Document No.7 is the letter of OP dated 04.10.2013 stating that as they provided the school facilities for his child so refunding of fees does not arise and called upon complainant to pay school fees for the month of August and September 2013.  Document No.8 consists of copies of receipts for having paid Rs.28,000/- in all towards monthly fees at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month from January to July 2013.  Document No.10 & 11 are the letter copies of Hon’ble Governor and others appreciating the work of OP school.  Some photos of the school were also produced by keeping in the envelope.

12. So taking the oral and documentary evidence of complainant and compare the same with material evidence of OP, it is made crystal clear that the complainant got admitted his mentally retarded son to the OP school in the month of January 2013 by paying donation of Rs.35,000/- out of Rs.50,000/- and balance was of Rs.15,000/- to be payable to school by complainant.  The complainant has started sending the child to school of OP and child has attended the school from January 2013 to 1^st week of July 2013 by paying Rs.4,000/- per month as a fee.  Thereafter the OP started sending notes to the parents of the child to pay balance amount of Rs.15,000/- towards admission fee but complainant has not produced any documentary evidence to show that he has paid Rs.35,000/- to OP towards donation out of Rs.50,000/- agreed except stating in the complaint and during the course of evidence.  The main allegation of complainant is that his child was given mental tortured by not allowing the child to go inside classroom and insulting his wife when she went to school in the month of July 2013 and in this regard the complainant wrote a letter to OP school in the month of August 2013 complaining about the ill-treatment to his child and rude behavior of school staff with his wife and to that letter OP gave reply without denying the ill-treatment meted out by the complainant’s child and his wife but OP called upon the complainant to come to school to sort out the problem.

13. The oral evidence of complainant that his child has been harassed mentally and physically by waiting outside the class room in the month of July 2013 by OP and his staff giving much home work to complete the over writing home work immediately etc., and not behaving properly with his wife and pestering the child to bring balance amount of Rs.15,000/- by writing in a diary stands corroborated by correspondences made by the complainant to school and reply of OP to the letter of complainant and dairy book produced by the complainant.  The act of OP in not treating the mentally retarded child of the complainant with utmost love and affection after receiving fees from the complainant and pestering of child to bring balance amount by writing in daily oftenly and giving much home work exercises to the said child to complete it immediately and not behaving politely with the wife of the complainant when she went to school in the month of July 2013 tantamounts to sheer negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the OP and on account of negligence of OP, the complainant has stopped sending the child to the OP institution and thereby the child of complainant has lost entire year and as such we are of the view that the oral and documentary evidence of complainant placed before the Forum are more believable, trustworthy and acted upon than the material evidence of OP.  So from the material evidence placed by both the parties we are of the considered opinion that the complainant who comes to Forum seeking relief has proved this point with clear and tangible material evidence that OP is negligent and there is a deficiency of service on the part of OP in imparting the education to his mentally retarded child and accordingly we answer this point in a affirmative.

14. It is no doubt true that the complainant has not produced any receipt for having paid Rs.35,000/- to OP towards admission fee or donation out of Rs.50,000/- he promised.  But in the dairy produced by complainant there is a wording written by teacher of OP institution dated 08.07.2013 addressed to parents to pay balance amount of admission of Rs.15,000/-.  The said wording makes it clear that some amount must have paid already by the complainant to OP towards admission but unfortunately no documentary evidence is produced by complainant for having paid the amount towards admission or donation.  In the absence of vouch safing any documentary evidence it is not justifiable to hold on presumptions and assumptions that the complainant has paid Rs.35,000/- to OP towards admission or donation to OP school.  However the complainant has produced receipt for having paid Rs.28,000/- to OP school from January to July at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month.  In view of negligence and deficiency of service on the part of OP the complainant is entitled to claim refund of Rs.28,000/- from OP along with nominal interest.  That apart the behavior of OP towards mentally retarded child of the complainant by pestering the child to bring the balance advance amount by writing in a dairy and not allowing the child to classroom till the amount is paid and giving much home work to said impaired child is stated to be rude in human and barbaric in the civilized society and for that OP is liable to compensate the complainant by paying compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and harassment to the impaired child and his mother.  So OP is directed to refund Rs.28,000/- to the complainant along with 6% interest on the said amount from the date of complaint within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which OP shall pay the said amount to the complainant along with 7% interest p.a on the said amount from the date of complaint to till the date of realization.  OP is further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and harassment to the child of the complainant and also rude behavior with wife of complainant along with litigation cost of Rs.2,500/-.  Accordingly, we answer this point.  In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following:    

       O R D E R

The complaint of the complainant is partly allowed.  OP is directed to refund Rs.28,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a on the said amount from the date of complaint within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which OP shall pay said amount to the complainant along with interest @ 7% p.a on the said amount from the date of complaint to till the date of realization.  OP is further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for mental agony and harassment along with litigation cost of Rs.2,500/-. 

This order is to be complied by OP within 30 days from the date of the order.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 11^th day of June 2015)

MEMBER                                                                 PRESIDENT

Vln* 

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant dated 21.06.2014

1. Sri.Laxmikant Parashar

Witnesses examined on behalf of the OP dated 26.07.2014

1.      Mrs.Husna Fathima Rahaman

MEMBER                                                                 PRESIDENT

Vln*