BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 29/04/2014

Date of Order : 30/04/2015

Present :-

Shri. Cherian. K. Kuriakose, President.

Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.

Smt. V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.

C.C. No. 327/2014

Between

And

O R D E R

Sheen Jose, Member.

1. Shortly stated, the case of the complainant is as follows :-

On 02-11-2013, the complainant approached the opposite party to learn driving. He opposite party demanded a total sum of Rs. 6,000/- to obtain the licence to drive the car and bike. The opposite party has not issued any receipt for the amount paid by the complainant. Later, the opposite party informed that the complainant may approach another driving school, winch is having tie-up with the opposite party, since, the opposite party is not in possession of motor bike. However, the opposite party could provide driving classes only for six days having a duration of 20 minutes/per day. On 08-04-2013, the day fixed for driving test, nobody was present to give necessary directions to the complainant, the application for driving test submitted through the opposite party was improper and incomplete, however, at the request of the complainant. The R.T.O. permitted the complainant to participate the driving test. The complainant could not pass the test only due to the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. It was informed by the opposite party that the complainant will have to pay further amount of learn bike driving. The complainant is not in a position to pay any further amount. The complainant now claims that he is entitled to get refund Rs. 6,350/-, the amount paid by him to the opposite party together with a compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. Hence this complaint.

2. The version of the opposite party is as follows :-

The complainant joined the opposite party to learn driving and to avail licence to drive car and motor bike. At the instance of the opposite party, the complainant provide driving from another driving school. Due to the heavy traffic, the motor driving school is not in a possession to learnt driving classes for more than 20 minutes per day. The opposite party managed to obtain learner's license for the complainant. The complainant failed the 1^st driving test. Though the opposite party insisted the complainant to learn driving further, he did not turn up. The opposite party is ready and willing to impart service to the complainant. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

3. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainant. Exts. A1 to A14 were marked on his side. After filing the version, the opposite party did not co-operate with the proceedings in this Forum for his own reasons. Heard the complainant who appeared in person.

4. The issues came up for consideration are as follows :-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 6,350/- from the opposite party?

2. Whether the opposite party is liable to pay any compensation to the complainant?

5. Issue No. i. :- It is an admitted case that the complainant approached the opposite party to learn driving of car and motor bike and the opposite party accepted Rs. 6,000/- from the complainant towards fees. The opposite party in their version categorically admitted that he could not teach driving properly due to the heavy traffic and technical reasons. Since, the complainant has approached the opposite party to avail service from the opposite party for consideration, it is the duty of the opposite party to provide service without fail. In this case, admittedly the opposite party failed in their duty to provide proper service to the complainant, though the opposite party had received Rs. 6,000/- from the complainant. It is strange to note that the opposite party initially agreed to teach driving of car and motor bike, even when the opposite party was not in possession of a motor bike. The very conduct on the part of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. There is no evidence on record to discard the averments of the complainant and the evidence vide Exts. A1 to A14 produced in this Forum. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant is entitled to get refund of Rs. 6,350/- from the opposite party.

6. Issue No. ii. :- The complainant had to spend his time and energy unnecessarily in view of the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Moreover, the complainant is a casual labourer, who is the sole bread winner of the family. Compensation is called for. We fix it at Rs. 2,000/-.

7. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct as follows :-

1. The opposite party shall refund Rs. 6,350/- to the complainant, which the opposite party had received from the complainant.

2. The opposite party shall also pay Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30^th day of April 2015

Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.

Sd/- Cherian. K. Kuriakose, President.

Sd/- V.K. Beena Kumari, Member.

Forwarded/By Order,

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil