This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of Consumer Protection Act by the complainant Shivaraj against the Ops- (1) Secretary Lion’s School, Raichur (2) Head Mistress Lion’s School Raichur for deficiency of service and for compensation of Rs. 20 Lakhs (including interest charged @ 15% p.a. from the date of cause of action). It is alleged that the first son of the complainant by name Master Sunil Kumar aged about (13) years was a student of OP.No-1 School studying in 8th Standard and he was prosecuting his studies in the said school since last year. OP.No-1 is a Private Educational School conducting teaching from LKG to 10th standard which is recognized by the Government of Karnataka and every year requisite fees was also remitted by the complainant. It is the duty of OP.No-1 & 2 to take total care and to give proper protection to all the students during the school timings. It is also their obligation to take appropriate measures or to provide basic facilities required to its student either at the time of his study or at the time of sports and fully during their school timings i.e, from 9-45 AM to 4-45 PM and until the student reaches his home. The school and its authorities are expected to render proper services not only to the students but also to their parents.<br /> <br /> On 14-11-06 (Children’s Day) his son Sunil Kumar went to school as usual. The State Government in-fact declared the said day as a full working day. On that day at about 14-00 hours the complainant received an information that some of the school student of OP.No-1 has drowned in a pond situated at Agricultural Campus, Lingasugur Road, Raichur. Immediately he rushed to the spot and was shocked to know that his son has died in the pond. The dead body of his son Sunil Kumar was taken out from the pond then he lodged a complaint before the police authority and the same was numbered as UDR.NO. 14/06. His son Sunil Kumar was brilliant/merit student and an outstanding sports-boy and he was awarded with many Certificates both from school and other organizations. The death of his son has caused unbareble mental agony and great shock to him and to his family.<br /> <br /> OP.NO- 1 & 2 being responsible in all respect of the student, have failed to take care of some students including Sunil Kumar. If the school authority had taken little care the tragic incident could have been avoided. It is the duty of OPs to maintain discipline amongst the students as students are of tender age. Therefore school authorities, teachers and staff are vicariously liable for the gross negligence and guilty of deficiency in service. Hence he has sought for direction to OPS 1 & 2 jointly & severally to pay compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/-.(including interest charge @ 15% p.a. from the date of cause of action).<br /> <br /> 2. The complainant has filed in all (6) documents along-with the complaint as per list which shows mistaken number as 1, and 9 to 13. They are (1) Xerox copy of Marks card of 6th & 7th standard (2) Certificate issued by Zilla Parishad & Education Department awarded 1st prize in Hand ball & Hockey. (3) List of Holidays published by Government of Karnataka for the year 2006-07 (4) List of Holidays published by Educational Department for the year 2006-07. (5) FIR & Medical, Post Mortem Reports etc., (6) Legal Notice with RPAD. <br /> <br /> 3. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant on admission of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 4. Admittedly the 14th November 2006 was a Children’s Day of-course it was not a holiday for school. In this case School Attendance Certificate is not produced to show that student Sunil Kumar had attended the school on that day. However in a similar case in DCFR.No. 15/07 we had an occasion to consider statements of students recorded by the police in UDR.No. 14/06 filed in that case. The statements include the four students of OP.No-1 school namely: (1) Adarsh S/o. Raja Panduranga Nayak (14) years studying in 8th class, (2) Pavan S/o.Hanuman Singh (13) years studying in 7th standard (3) Gurunath S/o. Basavarajappagouda (14) years studying in 8th standard and (4) Sumit Kumar S/o. Nehuru (15) years studying in 8th class. The statement of these four students go to show that on 14-11-06 at about 9-00 AM they attended OP.No-1 school for the celebration of Children’s Day and at about 12-30 PM their school closed (“£ÀªÀÄä ±Á¯É 12-30 WÀAmÉUÉ ©nÖzÀĔÝ). Then they along with other students of their school namely: Vinod Kumar, Vijayaraju, Manjunath, Sunil Kumar & Deepak planned to go and see Agricultural Farm. Accordingly they all went on their respective bicycles to the Agricultural Farm where they parked their cycles and went near the (water) pond. At that time Sunil Kumar & Deepak expressed desire for swimming in the pond but these four students did not agree. However Sunil Kumar & Deepak went to the pond by removing their cloths for swimming. It was about 13-30 hours they observed and suspected drowning of these two boys. Being afraid they informed some (masionery) persons ( who were constructing house) in nearby place and some four (Masionery) persons came and jumped into the pond-water and searched for drowned student Deepak & Sunil Kumar and took out body of the two drowned students who were dead. <br /> <br /> 5. From the statements of these Four student of the OP.No-1 school it shows that on 14-11-06 even though was not a holiday but after celebration of childrens day function the school came to be closed and the two drowned student along with these four students planned to go to Agricultural Forms and went with their bicycles and in-spite of disliking by these four boys, the ill-fated two boys went to swim in the pond etc., <br /> 6. The complainant in para-4 of the complaint has specifically stated that it is the duty of OP.No-1 & 2 to take total care and to give proper protection during the school timings and to take appropriate measures or to provide basic facilities required to all student during school timings or at the time of sports. Admittedly the students having gone to the Agricultural Farm is not a sports programme or an Exertion trip by the school. Especially when according to the statements of the four students of the school who had accompanied the two ill-fated students to Agricultural Farms, have clearly stated that after celebration of ‘children day’ in the school on 14-11-2006 at about 12-30 PM they along with the two ill-fated students planned and went to the Agricultural Farm and the two ill-fated students went to swim in the pond in-spite of non-acceptance of their offer by these four students. If this is so then how can it be said that the Ops 1 & 2 being responsible have failed to take care of student?. Consequently OP.No-1 & 2 cannot be said to be guilty of deficiency of service as alleged. Hence prima-facie we do not find deficiency in service by the Ops 1 & 2 so as to admit the complaint for enquiry. Therefore the complaint is liable to be rejected U/s. 12 (3) of C.P. Act. This our view is supported by the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala reported in 2007 CTJ 8 (CP) Head Note which reads as under:<br /> <br /> “Complaint/appeal__Formal admission of complaint/appeal__Consumer Protection Act, 1986__Sections 12, 13, 19, 26__ Whether a complaint/appeal filed before a District Forum/State Commission requires formal admission?__ Held, yes__Not automatic__Before admitting it and issuing its notice to the Opposite party/respondent, it is necessary for the District Forum/State Commission to consider the question of its maintainability”.<br /> <br /> In this view of the matter we pass the following order:<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> The complaint of the complainant is hereby rejected U/s. 12(3) of the Act, as not maintainable. <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 09- 03-07)<br /> On leave Sd/- Sd/-<br /> Smt.Kavita Patil, Sri. Pampannagouda Sri. N.H. Savalagi,<br /> Member. Member. President, <br /> Dist.Forum-Raichur. Dist-Forum-Raichur Dist-Forum-Raichur.<br /> <br />