By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:

O.P. No. 118/2003

The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

The Complainant was a student in the Computer Training Centre of the Opposite party's. The Opposite Party gave wide advertisements with respect to their establishments and the course conducted. A six semester course e-ACCP is much job oriented having enough scope for placement and it will be facilitated by their placement cell 'Aptech Brain Bank'. The course offered by them was conducted in 3 stages for a duration of 3 years and the fees for total course was Rs.47,475/-. On completion of the 1^st year the student would be given the certificate of CPISM and DISM. The certificate issued on successful completion of the 2^nd year is HDSE and similarly the 3^rd year certificate issued is ADSE. The option is left for the student to continue stage after stage or to stop it. The Complainant had enrolled for the DISM course on 19.7.1999 soon after the admission to the course the Complainant could realise that the offer made by the Opposite Parties were absolutely false. There were no proper classes the study materials were not sufficiently supplied upon completion of 1^st year no examination was conducted. After the 1^st year the Complainant was upgraded to ADSE course. Immediately after the 1^st year the Complainant got appointment of a job in Banglore. The Opposite Party was requested to transfer him to the Aptech Computer in Banglore. Though the Opposite Party agreed for it and informed the Complainant that Complainant would be transferred to Aptech Computer in Bangalore, but the authorities in Aptech Computer in Bangalore demanded from  the Complainant the fees for the studies in the institute. The 1^st Opposite Party has also assured that the fees would be paid but the promises given by the 1^st Opposite Party was not fulfilled. The Complainant had to drop the job and studies in Bangalore and to came back to Kalpetta and resumed the studies in the concern of the 1^st Opposite Party. The Opposite Party had not provided computer equipments. The computer those of which installed in the centre were obsolete models. They were no library to equip the students for the course offered. The final examination were not conducted and no mark list were given.

2. On completion of course from the side of the Students the 1^st Opposite Party gave further offer that the course on HDSE would be completed within two months with sufficient study materials. All the words of the 1^st Opposite Party were later swallowed by himself and in effect the Complainant had to spent Rs. 32,200/- towards the course fee. The Complainant had to forsake his three years in the peak ours of his life and the job in Bangalore was discontinued and more over Rs.4,500/- paid in the Bangalore centre was also lost. The unfair and improper dealing of the 1^st Opposite Party was informed to the 2^nd Opposite Party but there was no response. The act of the Opposite Party is a deficiency in service. The Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the loss and damages caused to the Complainant. There may be an order directing the Opposite Parties to give the Complainant to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards the compensation for the loss and injury caused by the Opposite Party along with cost.

3. The sum up of the versions filed by the 1^st Opposite Party is as follows:- The admission of the Complainant for the Aptech Computer education is admitted. The allegations of the Complainant that the lack of study materials and other facilities were not given  sufficiently are denied. The Computer installed in the centre are of obsolete models and the same were not conducive enough to install the required software are nothing but false. The 1^st Opposite Party supplied sufficient study materials and conducted practical classes regularly. The Complainant appeared for the examination and secured more than 60% mark in the respective examination. The mark lists were also issued to the Complainant. The allegation of the Complainant that the Opposite Party did not transfer the fees to Bangalore is false. There is no lagging on the part of the 1^st Opposite Party in providing the better coaching equipments. The Opposite Party has not collected Rs. 32,200/- towards the course fee. The 1^st opposite Party has not done any breach of contract and no such chance for the loss of three valuable years was caused by the 1^st Opposite Party. The claim of the Complainant for Rs. 5 lakh is not supported by any accounts and the Complainant is not entitled for it also. The Complainant was admitted for CPISM course and upgraded to ADSE course on 7.11.2000. The semester examinations were conducted in the 1^st and 2^nd Semester. The Complainant passed the examination with 60% mark and the performance sheet was also given to the Complainant. Periodic meeting of the staff and students were conducted. The offer of the Opposite Party for admission to Net Engineering Course was nothing but to as source found out to make the students remit the fees and to collect the enhanced fees. The spirit of the discussion in the meeting of students was given in writing to the Complainant. The Complainant was not a regular student in the class. The course was completed by the Complainant and as a result the Complainant is not entitled for the refund of the fees. The fees collected was for the period of 3 years and the Complainant had undergone the course and in such a situation the complainant is not entitled for the cost and Compensation. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

4. The 2^nd Opposite Party filed version and in brief it is as follows:- The 2^nd Opposite Party is a company constituted under the Indian Companies Act 1956. Which imparts computer based education to the aspirant students through out India. The 1^st Opposite Party is the franchise of the 2^nd Opposite Party. As per the terms agreed upon providing the centre, the infrastructure for the institute is to be appropriately made to conduct the classes. There is no brevity of contract with the Complainant by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The fees are collected

and receipts were given by the 1^st party. For the advertisement purpose the logo of the 2^nd Opposite Party is used, the continuation of the course by the Complainant itself is a fact which

establish that the complainant was satisfied with the course. The study materials and other booklets were supplied by the 2^nd opposite party and on successful completion of the course the certificates are also given. The Complainant had not completed the course and in effect the certificates were not given. The issuance of the certificate was only possible when the course was completed successfully. There is no brevity of contract with the Complainant and this Opposite Party. The course were over strictly complied to the brochure if anything done by the 1^st Opposite party apart from the terms and conditions in between them and the 2^nd Opposite Party they are not responsible for it. The complaint deserves no merit and it is to be dismissed with cost.

O.P. No. 120/2003

5. The sum up of the complaint:- Attracted by the large scale advertisement of the Opposite Party the Complainant joined for the six semester e-ACCP Course conducted by the Opposite Party. The publicity was as such that on successful completion easy placement would be given through the Opposite Parties placement cell 'Aptech Brain Bank. The duration of the course e-ACCP is 3 years in 6 Semester and the total fees for the same is Rs.49,950/-. The course is conducted in 3 stage. After the 1^st stage which means the 1^st year, the certificate of CPISM and DISM Course, after completion of the 2^nd year certificate of HDSE and on completion of the 3^rd stage ADSE certificate would be issued. On successful completion each stage the relevant certificate would be given. The complainant was enthralled with the wide scope of the course. On 31.5.2000 the Complainant joined for CPISM course later upgraded to ADSE course on completion of Six months. For ADSE course study materials were not supplied and the classes were not properly conducted. The computer installed in the centre were absolute and were not conduce enough to install the required software as recommended and offered by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The concern was not equipped with library and study materials on completion of course by the Complainant and other students offer was given one after the other and in later the 1^st Opposite Party gave statements of assurance in writing and it was also proposed that the 1^st Opposite Party would conduct a Net Engineering Course concession fees. All the assurances of the Complainant were not in effect 3 valuable years were lost to the Complainant in brimming stage of his life. More over heavy financial loss and mental shock was the result in total for joining the course. The 2^nd Opposite Party was informed of the hardship and difficulties but not responded. The act of the Opposite Parties are deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The Complainant is to be compensated with Rs.5,00,000/- towards the loss and damages caused to him

6. The sum up of the version filed by the 1^st Opposite Party is as follows. The Complainant was a student of Aptech Computer Education, Kalpetta. The allegation as such that the Opposite Party failed to provide study materials sufficient for the course and the classes were not conducted properly are denied. The computers supplied for the student were of the obsolete model and were not conducive enough to install the required software are nothing but false. There were regular classes with well equipped laboratory and study materials. The final examination for semesters were conducted and the mark sheets were also supplied to the Complainant. No where in the duration of the course the Complainants requested to the 1^st Opposite Party with any allegation. The Complainant was upgraded to ADSE course and further an additional course of Net Engineering was also offered to the Complainant without any fees and that facility was available to those who paid the entire fees for the ADSE course in time. This Opposite Party has not collected Rs.46,675/- towards the course fee. There was no breach of contract and there was no withdrawals from the offer of the 1^st Opposite Party. The compensation quantified Rs.5,00,000/- is not based on any accountability. The classes conducted were with efficient and qualified teachers. The 1^st and 2^nd semester examination were attended by the Complainant and obtained more than 60% mark in each semester exam. The 1^st Opposite Party conducted the meeting of the student and based on the spirit of meeting the sum up of the decision were drawn out from the meeting which was written and given to the complainant. The Complainant was not a regular student and he had not attended the examinations. The ADSE course was completed within the duration as offered. The Complainant is neither entitled for the refund of the fees nor for any compensation. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

7. The 2^nd Opposite Party filed version, in brief it is as follows:- The 1^st Opposite Party is one of the franchisee of the 2^nd Opposite Party. The 2^nd opposite party is the company constituted under the Indian Companies Act 1956 engaged in imparting computer education having branches all over the country. The 1^st Opposite Party entered in to an agreement with the 2^nd Opposite Party as per which the supply of study materials and other infrastructure are to be met by the 1^st Opposite Party. There is no privity of contract by the 2^nd Opposite Party with the complainant. The acceptance of fees and the receipts were given towards the same which all were done by the 1^st Opposite Party. The 2^nd opposite party's logo was used for advertisement of the course offered. The study materials which are to be given by the 2^nd Opposite Party were given to the 1^st Opposite Party in time. On successful completion of the course the 2^nd Opposite Party issued certificate to the students who were qualified for it. It is known to the 2^nd Opposite Party that the Complainants had not attended the examination and the same was informed to the parents of the Complainants. In case of any shortcomings with respect to the study materials or anything else related to the conduction of the course it was to be informed to the 2^nd Opposite Party. In any time in the brief of the course no complaint was given to the 2^nd Opposite Party by the any of the student. In the absence of completing the course and if the examination was not attended and qualified, the issuance of certificate is impossible. The Complainant is not entitled for any relief and cost the amount claimed by the Complainant is only imaginary and not relying on any factual aspects. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

O.P. No.121/2003

8. The complaint in brief:- The Complainant was influenced by the advertisement of the Opposite Party to join the course of ADSE, a 3^rd year course having 6 semester. The total fees for the course is Rs.58,300/- on completion of the 1^st year the certificate of CPISM and DISM and in the 2^nd year HDSE certificate in the 3 year ADSE certificate is to be issued. Agreeing to the Opposite Party ADSE course is more job oriental and was admitted for the course. The complainant was a student in Government College Mananthavady for 2^nd year B Com and sought admission for Computer course. In order to make it easy the study of the course the complainant transfered from Government College Mananthavady to Government College, Kalpetta. After admission to the course the Complainant recognised that the facility supplied to the student were not sufficient and proper. The study materials were not good enough to continue the education computer equipments were obsolete model, examination were not conducted properly and mark list for the examination appeared were not given. On the repeated request of the Complainant and other co-student assurance was given in written on the completion of the course within two months and another additional course of Net Engineering would be provided in concessional rate. The 1^st Opposite party collected Rs.50,300/- towards the course fees. Being the transfer was obtained by the Complainant in order to make it easy for the studies in Opposite Part's institution the Complainant had to

suffer the loss of one year. The Opposite Party's Act is an unfair trade practise and deficiency in service. The Complainant is to be compensated with Rs.5,00,000/- along with cost.

9. The 1^st Opposite Party filed version the sum up of the version of the 1^st Opposite

Party is as follows:- The Complainant was the student as admitted by the 1^st Opposite Party. The allegation of the Complainant that there were no sufficient study materials and the classes were not conducted properly are nothing but allegations without any basis. The 1^st Opposite Party provided well equipped library and other facilities necessary for the studies of the Complainant and others. The final examination in the semester were conducted in time and the Complainant secured 60% marks. The Complainant was upgraded to 3^rd year ADSE course which completed in the month of November 2003. In addition to the better convenience the net engineering course was conducted by the 1^st Opposite Party. The allegation of the Complainant that the Opposite Party committed the breach of contract is nothing but false.The 1^st Opposite Party provided better facilities and there were regular coaching classes the Complainant who joined CPISM course was upgraded to ADSE course. The Complainant and all other students were satisfied with the teaching and study materials. In 2^nd semester examination the Complainant got 60% mark. The offer of net engineering course was done with the intension to enhance the fees collection. In a meeting of the students and the 1^st Opposite Party some decisions were taken and it was written and given to the Complainant.

10. There is no deficiency or shortcomings in the service of the 1^st Opposite Party. The courses were conducted as offered. The claim of the Complainant for Rs.5,00,000/- is only an imaginary amount. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

11. The version of the 2^nd opposite party in brief:- The 2^nd Opposite Party is constituted under Indian Companies Act having branches all over India imparting computer based education.

12. In the 1^st Opposite Party is only a franchisee or agent who entered in to an agreement with the 2^nd Opposite Party. As per which the infrastructure for running the institution including the computer and other study materials are to be supplied by the 1^st Opposite Party. The 2^nd Opposite Party has no privity of contract with the Complainant. For the purpose of advertisement the name and logo of the 2^nd Opposite Party is used by the 1^st Opposite Party. From the Complainant itself it is clear that the Complainant was satisfied with the course. The 2^nd Opposite Party is bound to give certificate to each of the students who successfully completed the course. The Complainant has not completed the course and not appeared for the examination.

13. In case of any shortcomings in the matter of study materials it would have been informed to the 2^nd Opposite Party. There was no breach of contract of the assurance given and more over the 2^nd Opposite Party has no privity of contract with the complainant.

14. The Complainant is not entitled for any relief as such cost and compensation. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost to the 2^nd Opposite Party.

O.P. No. 122/2003

15. The complaint in brief is as follows:- The Complainant influenced by wide advertisement of the Opposite Parties. The course of six semesters continued in a period of 3

years. The fees for the entire course was Rs.47,315/-. The assurance of the Opposite Parties was that on successful completion after one year certificate of CPISM and DISM would be given. After the 2^nd year a certificate of HDSE would be given after passing the examination and on completion of the course. In the upgraded stage towards the 3 year if the student completed the course and passed the examination ADSE certificate would be issued. Inspired by the advertisement and offer of the Opposite Party the Complainant enrolled for ADSE course on 28.8.2000. Soon after the admission to the course the Complainant could realize that classes were not conducted properly and sufficient study materials were not given to the students. There was no well equipped library good and sufficient enough for reference. Because of the compelsion from the side of students the 1^st Opposite Party assured the students that the course would be completed within 4 months and the examinations would be conducted. The assurance on the side of the 1^st Opposite Party was given in writing therein the materials required for the study would be given within two months as assured by the 1^st Opposite Party and another offer of the 1^st Opposite Party was that at the concessional rate the course of net engineering would be conducted. The complainant was trapped in the wide advertisements and assurance of the Opposite Parties which resulted the loss of 3 years. The defects caused to the Complainant were timely informed to the 2^nd Opposite Party but there was no response from that side too. The Complainant had a loss of Rs.5,00,000/- which is to be compensated. The Complainant prayed for the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- along with cost.

16. The Opposite Parties filed version. The sum up of the version filed by the 1^st Opposite Party is as follows. The Complainant was a student for ADSE course and for the ancillary courses prior to the ADSE Course. The allegation of the Complainant that the study materials were not sufficiently given and there were no classes as offered are nothing but false. The library of the 1^st Opposite Party was well equipped. Regular classes and examinations were periodically conducted. After the 1^st semester the complainant secured 60% mark and performance sheets were given to the Complainant. The Complainant had not approached the 1^st Opposite Party with a request to complete the course. The net engineering course was offered free of cost to those student who paid entire fees for ADSE course in time. The Complainant paid only Rs. 4,611/- towards course fees and this Opposite Party has never collected any fees for net engineering course. The Complainant attended the 2^nd semester examination as secured 69.4% mark performance sheet was also issued to the Complainant, revision classes were conducted for the students in ADSE course who requested for it. The net engineering course was offered to the students who remitted the course fees in time. It was decided in a meeting and decision taken was given in writing to the Complainant. The complainant did not attend the class after 11.12.2002 and it was also reported to the parents of the Complainant. There was no unfair trade practise or any deficiency in service. The amount claimed in the way of compensation is only imaginary the complaint is to be dismissed with cost.

17. The Complainants in O.P. No.118/2003, O.P. No.120/2003, O.P. No. 121/2003 and 122/2003 were the students in the concern of 1^st Opposite Party. The Opposite Parties in all the complaints are one and the same, the facts alleged are similar in nature. The Complainant applied for joint trial of all the cases and it was allowed.

18. The points which are to be considered in O.P. No.118/2003, O.P. No.120/2003, O.P. No. 121/2003 and O.P. No. 122/2003 are same and it is decided in common. The points in consideration are:-

1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?

2. Relief and cost.

19. Point No.1:- The documents produced by the Complainants are marked as Exts.A1 to A40 in support of their allegations. The 1^st Opposite Party swear their contentions and filed affidavit. Exts. B1 to B33 are marked on their side.

20. The case of the Complainants are that influenced by the advertisement given by the Opposite Parties, the Complainants sought admission for course of computer education which were declared to be held in 6 semesters. The classes for the Complainants were not properly conducted, study materials were not given sufficiently and those which were given were of not up to the quality. The examinations were not done as assured at the time of admission. According to the Opposite Parties classes were conducted properly the materials supplied for studies were of good quality. The allegations of the Complainants that no examinations were conducted in time is nothing but false. The Complainant in O.P. No.118/2003 was admitted at first for DISM course and it was on 20.7.1999. The admission of Complainant in O.P. No.120/03 was for CPISM course and application was dated 31.5.2000. The complainant in O.P. No. 121/2003 applied for ADSE course as per the application dated 06.8.2000. In O.P. No. 122/2003 the Complainant applied for ADSE course on 08.08.2000. The evidence drawn out from the documents produced has shown that all the complainants are later upgraded for ADSE course. The Complainant in O.P. No.118/2003 had transferred to Bangalore. The remittance of the fees in Bangalore Institute of the Aptech Computer is not supported by any documents and wheather any the payment made there was as per the direction of the 1^st Opposite Party. The 1^st Opposite Party acted as a franchise of the 2^nd Opposite Party. The classes were conducted by the 1^st Opposite Party. The role of the 2^nd Opposite Party is in the supervisory cappacity. The examinations are conducted as per the directions of the 2^nd Opposite Party. The infrastructure facilities in the institute are to be arranged by the 1^st Opposite party alone.

All the Complainants remitted the course fee and examinations fee for the various examinations. Ext.B3 is the students code of contract which details carrier of the student and specifications regarding the disciplinary aspect. Regarding the students complaint details description were given in Ext.B4. According to the Complainants immediately after the admission they had complained to the representative of the 2^nd Opposite Party and a written complaint was also given to the 1^st Opposite Party for the in adequate and improper management of the classes. The complaint in O.P. No.118/2003 has given Rs. 32,200/- to the 1^st Opposite Party towards the course fees, the examinations fees were given beyond the course fee. In O.P. No. 120/2003 towards the course fee the Complainant had given Rs.46,675/-. In O.P. No.121/2003 the fees remitted towards the course was Rs.44,730/-, the complaint in O.P. No. 122/2003 Rs.46,190/- was remitted for the course fees all the complainants were the students of ADSE course.

21. The 1^st Opposite Parties gave wide advertisement up on the scope and importance of the course. The one of the allegations of the Complainants is that examinations were not conducted as offered by the Opposite Party and no certificate were issued to the complainants. The 1^st Opposite Party in support of their contentions filed documents to show that all the four students did not attend the examinations upon which letters were sent to the parents of the Complainants. All the letters sent by the 1^st Opposite Party are dated 18.6.2003. According to the 1^st Opposite Party after completion of first 6 months examinations was to be conducted and a certificate of DISM course is to be given to the Complainant. As such towards the end of second year examination of HDSE course is to be conducted and those who passed in the examination were to be issued the certificate in that respect. Duration of ADSE course is three years the students who were admitted in 2000 June and July the period of completion of the course would have to be in June and July of 2003.

22. All the complaints are the students of upgrade course ADSE. The examinations for the different courses had to be conducted by the Opposite Party. The schedule of examinations and the question are designed by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has not initiated any disciplinary action against the Complainants. The contention of the 1^st Opposite Party that complainants had not attended the examination is not reasonable. During the period of three years certificates to the successful students has to be offered by the Opposite Party. CPISM, DISM and HDSE certificates are to be issued to the successful candidates. On completion of the 3^rd year the certificate ADSE is to be issued to the successful students. The Opposite Party has not produced any document to show that on successful completion of course the students were issued the certificates in that respect.

23. Ext.A7 is the terms agreed in between the students and the 1^st Opposite Party it is dated 11.12.2002. The 1^st Opposite Party already agreed and born out from the document that the study materials for ADSE had to be given within a period of two months. HDSE is a two year course. The students were admitted in the year 2000. One of the points agreed in between the students and the 1^st Opposite Party is that the HDSE course should be completed within four months and the certificate were to be given within 45 days. This document itself is a speaking example of gross latches on the part of the Opposite Parties. The non issuance of certificates for the respective course and withholding examinations for the aspirant students along with other latches afore said amount to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and the point No.1 is found accordingly.

24. Point No.2:- The complainant in O.P. No.118/2003 paid Rs. 29,000/- as per the invoice No.274 dated 31.8.2000. The Complainant in O.P. No.120/2003 is admitted for CPISM to ADSE courses as per invoice No.216 dated 31.5.2000 the payment made by the complainant is Rs.9,300/-. The fees payable to the Opposite Party is Rs.9,900/-. It is also seen that the fees pattern of same course has no uniformity. The Complainant in O.P. No. 121/2003 the invoice No.223 dated 8.6.2000. The fees paid by this Complainant is 48,100/- the payable fees is 58,300/-. The Complainant in O.P. No. 120/2003 remitted Rs.27,815/- as per invoice No.268 dated 28.8.2000 the fees payable by this Complainant is 46,115/-. There is considerable disparity in the structure of the fees for the same course among the students. According to the Complainants the 2^nd Opposite Party was informed of the irregularity in conduction of the course and the examination. The 1^st Opposite Party is the franchisee of the 2^nd Opposite Party, the responsibility on the part of the 2^nd Opposite Party is not kept up in supervising and administration of the examination. All the Complainant has not paid the entire fees designed by the Opposite Party. The Complainants had spent three years in the institute of the 1^st Opposite Party with a desire of getting certificates for the different course. All the Complainants remitted the major portion of the fees as demanded by the Opposite Parties. The Complainants are entitled for the cost and compensation from the Opposite Parties. The fees paid by the Complainants are not in uniform, however they all joined for the ADSE Course.

In the result, the complaints are partly allowed. The Opposite Parties are directed to give jointly or severally to each of the Complaints in O.P. 118/03, O.P. 120/03, O.P. 121/03 and O.P. 124/03 Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) along with cost of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) within one month from the date of receiving this order.

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31^st day of October 2008.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER-I : Sd/-

MEMBER-II: Sd/-

COMON APPENDIX

Witnesses for the Complainant:

PW1. Sijo Student.

PW2. Varun. Student.

PW3. Manoj.

Witnesses for the Opposite Parties:

OPW1. Ajith Software Project Manager.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Notice.

A2. Advertisement.

A3. Course details

A4. Invoice. dt:28.8.2000.

A5.Series.

(18 in numbers)Receipts.

A6. Receipt. dt:12.12.2002.

A7. Agreement. dt:11.12.2002.

A8. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

A9 Advertisement

A9.(a) Advertisement

A9 (b) Advertisement

A10. Invoice. dt:31.5.2000

A11. Invoice. dt:31.8.2000.

A12.series.

(16 in numbers) Receipt. dt:31.5.2000

A13. Copy of Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

A14. Invoice. dt:19.7.99

A15. Invoice. dt:31.8.2000.

A16.(8 in numbers) Receipt. dt:27.3.2001.

A17. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

A18. Invoice. dt: 8.6.2000

A19. Receipt. dt:27.9.2000.

A20. Receipt. dt:28.10.2000.

A21. Receipt. dt:15.12.2000.

A22. Receipt. dt:27.01.2001

A23. Receipt. dt:02.03.2001.

A24. Receipt. dt:13.03.2001.

A25. Receipt. dt:23.6.2001.

A26. Receipt. dt:21.04.2001.

A27. Receipt. dt:23.07.2001.

A28. Receipt. dt:30.07.2001.

A29. Receipt. dt:13.10.2001.

A30. Receipt. dt:17.11.2001.

A31. Receipt. dt:15.12.2001.

A32. Receipt. dt:14.01.2002.

A33. Receipt. dt:16.02.2002.

A34. Receipt. dt:23.03.2002.

A35. Receipt. dt:16.04.2002.

A36. Receipt. dt:25.05.2002.

A37. Receipt. dt:10.09.2002.

A38. Receipt. dt:07.11.2002.

A39. Receipt. dt:20.9.2001

A40. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:

B1. Acknowledgment by Student dt:28.8.2000

B2. Acknowledgment by Student. dt:03.01.2002.

B3. Students Code of conduct.

B4. Copy of Application Form. dt:20.7.99.

B5. Acknowledgement.

B6(2 sheets) Copy of Students Ledger (Page No.31, 216) dt:31.8.2000.

B7. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

B8. Statement.

B9. Students Ledger (Page No.215)

B10. Copy of Application Form.

B11. Letter. dt:18.6.2003.

B12. Acknowledgment.

B13. Copy of Students ledger (Page No. 155). dt:8.6.2000.

B14. Copy of Application Form. dt:6.8.2000.

B15. Students details.

B16. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

B17. Acknowledgment

B18. Acknowledgment by Student. dt:6.8.2000.

B19. Copy of Students Ledger (Page No.210)

B20. Copy of Application

B21. Letter. dt:18.06.2003.

B22. Acknowledgment

B23. Students Attendance Report for Final

Final Examination. dt:01.04.01

B24.(2 sheets) Final Examination Draft Results. dt: 12.4.01.

B25. Copy of Final Examination Results. dt:20.04.2001.

B26. Students Attendance Report for Final

Examination. dt:01.07.01.

B27. Students Attendance Report for Final

Examination. dt:12.6.02.

B28. Result Details.

B29.(3 sheets)Requisition for Performance Statements and

Certificates.

B30.(2 sheet) Requisition for Performance Statements and

Certificates.

B31.Series (16 sheets) Final Examination Draft Result.

B32.Series (110 sheets) Students Attendance Report for Final Examination.

B33. 1^st Page of Students Ledger.