BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MANGALORE
Dated this the 9th August 2010
COMPLAINT NO.179/2010
(Admitted on 15.6.2010)
PRESENT:
1. Smt. Asha Shetty, President
2. Smt.Lavanya M. Rai, Member
BETWEEN:
Devaraj.B.
So Rukmayya Gowda,
Aged about 19 years,
Rat Balakka House, Santyar,
Puttur Taluk, D.K. …….. COMPLAINANT
(Advocate for Complainant: Sri Sanjay.D.)
VERSUS
Manager,
Franchisee, ADL Studio,
4th Floor, Above Ganesh Bazar,
G.H.S.Bulding, G.H.S. Road,
Hampanakatte,
Mangalore. ……. OPPOSITE PARTY
(Opposite Party: Exparte)
ORDER DELIVERED BY PRESIDENT SMT. ASHA SHETTY:
1. The facts of the complaint in brief are as follows:
This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party claiming certain reliefs.
The Complainant submits that, with an intention to learn the Animation Course has joined the Opposite Party institution on 13.5.2009 and paid the fee of Rs.6,000/- as per Receipt No.2910 to the Opposite Party.
When the matter stood thus, the Complainant could not attend the Animation classes due to family problems. It is submitted that, the Complainant did not attend even single class after the payment of the fees. Hence, the Complainant addressed a letter dated 11.7.2009 to the Opposite Party intimating the reason for non-attendance and to refund the fees paid to the Opposite Party. But the Opposite Party did not respond the above said letter and request. Thereafter, the Complainant issued a Lawyer’s Notice dated 17.3.2010 the same has been served to the Opposite Party. Despite of that the Opposite Party failed to refund the fees and hence the above complaint is filed by the Complainant before this Forum under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’) seeking direction from this Forum to the Opposite Party to refund Rs.6,000/- to the Complainant with interest at 12% per annum from 13.5.2009 till payment and also pay compensation and cost of the proceedings.
2. Version notice served to the Opposite Party by R.P.A.D. Despite of receiving version notice not appeared nor contested the case till this date. Hence, we have proceeded exparte as against the Opposite Party. The postal acknowledgement marked as Court document No.1.
3. The points that arise for our consideration in this case are as follows:
- Whether the Complainant proves that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service?
- If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed?
- What order?
4. In support of the complaint, Mr.Devaraj (CW1) Complainant filed affidavit reiterating what has been stated in the complaint and produced Ex C1 to C4 as listed in the annexure. Opposite Party not led any evidence.
We have considered the submission made by the learned counsel and also considered the materials that was placed before the Forum and answered the points are as follows:
Point No.(i): Affirmative.
Point No.(ii) & (iii): As per the final order.
REASONS
5. POINTS NO. (i) to (iii):
The Complainant filed evidence by way of affidavit and produced Ex.C1 to C4 in order to substantiate his Complaint. On careful scrutiny of the evidence as well as documents in proof, we find that, Ex.C1 is the original Receipt issued by the Opposite Party, wherein, it reveals that, the Complainant paid Rs.6,000/- on 13.5.2009 to the Opposite Party in order to learn Animation Course. Ex.C2 is the letter dated 11.7.2009 issued to the Opposite Party stating that due to his family problems he is not in a position to attend the course and informed the Opposite Party that he is going to discontinue the course. Ex.C3 is the legal notice dated 17.3.2010 issued by the Complainant counsel reveals that due to family problem he could not attend the class even for a day and sought for refund of the fees. The above said notice has been served to the Opposite Party. The acknowledgement produced by the Complainant before this Forum shows that the above stated notice has been served to the Opposite Party as per Ex.C4. The original Receipt reveals that, the Complainant approached the Opposite Party and paid the entire course fee for the whole course i.e. Rs.6,000/- and filed a evidence before us stating that, he could not attend a single day to avail the service of the Opposite Party due to his family problem. Further we have observed that, the Opposite Party despite of receiving version notice as well as legal notice dated 17.3.2010 not bothered to contest the case till this date shows that the entire allegations made by the Complainant is admitted by the Opposite Party. The entire evidence as well as documents produced before this Forum proved beyond doubt that the Complainant could not attend the course due to his family problems. The above stated evidence on record is not contradicted/controverted by the Opposite Party. The unrebutted evidence requires no further proof. Under that circumstances, we hold that, whatever stated by the Complainant in this complaint holds good.
It is a significant to note that, the Complainant admittedly paid the fees on 13.5.2009 for the entire course in advance. Further it also reveals that he had not attended a single day to avail the service of the Opposite Party institution. Under that circumstance, the Opposite Party is not just in withholding the amount of the Complainant. When a Complainant not availed the service of the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party ought to have refunded the amount to the Complainant atleast after receipt of the legal notice. No payment has been made by the Opposite Party till this date amounts to deficiency.
In view of the above discussion, we direct the Opposite Party i.e. Franchisee, ADL STUDIO represented by its Manager is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.6,000/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of payment till the date of realization. In the present case, interest considered by this Forum itself is compensation and therefore, no separate amount for compensation is awarded and further Rs.1,000/- awarded as cost of the litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.
6. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
The complaint is allowed. The Opposite Party i.e. Franchisee, ADL STUDIO represented by its Manager is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six thousand only) to the Complainant along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of payment till the date of realization and also pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as cost of litigation expenses. Payment shall be made within 30 days from the date of this order.
The copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and therefore the file be consigned to record.
(Page No.1 to 7 dictated to the Stenographer typed by him, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 9th day of August 2010.)
PRESIDENT MEMBER
ANNEXURE
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:
CW 1 – Mr.Devaraj – Complainant.
Documents produced on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.C1 – 13.5.2009: Original receipt issued by the Opposite Party.
Ex.C2 – 11.7.2009: Letter addressed by the Complainant to the Opposite Party.
Ex.C3 – 17.3.2010: Office copy of the regd. Lawyer’s notice.
Ex.C4 – 19.3.2010: Copy of Postal Acknowledgement.
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:
-Nil-
Documents produced on behalf of the Opposite Party:
- Nil -
Dated:9.8.2010 PRESIDENT
