Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/663/2019

Ankush Vatia - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manya Education Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

18 Nov 2019

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                                    ========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/663/2019
Date of Institution	:	02/07/2019
Date of Decision	:	18/11/2019

 

Ankush Vartia S/o Sh. Balbir Chand, R/o H.No.1468, Block 10, Adarsh Nagar, Naya Gaon, District Mohali.

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

Manya Education Pvt. Ltd., SCO No. 130-131, 3^rd Floor, Sector              34-A, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.

…… Opposite Party

QUORUM:	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	DR. S.K. SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person.
	:	Opposite Party ex-parte.

 

PER Dr.S.K.Sardana, Member

1.         The facts, in brief, are that the Complainant took admission in IELTS course with the OP-Institute by depositing a fee of Rs.11,355/-. The Complainant attended the classes only for 10 days and thereafter, due to his academic studies could not attend the IELTS classes. Accordingly, he requested the Opposite Party to refund the fee after deducting 10 days fee, but to no avail. Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte.
3.         Complainant led evidence.      
4.         We have gone through the entire record and heard the arguments addressed by the Complainant.
5.         Significantly, the Opposite Party did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party shows that it has nothing to say in its defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
6.         There is no dispute about the fact that the Complainant deposited a sum of Rs.11,355/- with the Opposite Party towards the fee for IELTS. The Complainant contended that he attended the classes for only 10 days and thereafter, he did not attend the said course as he got busy with his academic studies and requested the Opposite Party for refund of the balance fee, but the Opposite Party did not bother to refund the same despite repeated requests.
7.         In this view of the matter, we are of the concerted opinion that once the Complainant did not attend the Institute for full course, it was incumbent upon the Opposite Party to refund the balance fees, after deducting the proportionate fee for the period the Complainant attended the classes i.e. 10 days. It is settled proposition of law that no fee (including advance fee) can be illegally held by the Opposite Party for the period for which no coaching/ service is being availed by the Complainant.
8.         It is thus established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The harassment suffered by the Complainant is also writ large. The Opposite Party has certainly and definitely indulged into unfair trade practice as it ought to have refunded the balance fees after deducting the proportionate fee for the period the Complainant attended the classes, which they failed to do and propelled this unwarranted, uncalled for litigation upon the Complainant. At any rate, the Opposite Party even did not bother to redress the grievance of the Complainant despite having approached for the same by the Complainant time and again. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the Opposite Party.
9.         For the reasons recorded above, the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Party, and the same is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is directed:-

[a]    To refund the entire fee deposited by the Complainant after deducting the proportionate fee of 10 days.

[b]    To pay Rs.5500/- as compensation to the Complainant for deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and harassment caused to him. 

 [c]   To also pay a sum of Rs.5500/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. 

10.         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by Opposite Party; thereafter, Opposite Party shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as in sub-para [c]. 
11.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
18/11/2019	[DR.S.K.SARDANA]	[SURJEET KAUR]	[RATTAN SINGH THAKUR]
	Member	Member	President
“Dutt”