Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/15/271

Rukmani d/o Late Sh.Tirlok Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mata Saraswati Institute of Nursery Education - Opp.Party(s)

10 Mar 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

                                                            Complaint No:  271 of 23.04.2015.

                                                            Date of Decision: 10.03.2017.

Rukmani daughter of Late Sh. Tirlok Chand R/o. S.R.F., 65, PAU Campus, Ludhiana                                                                                                                                                                                                   ..…Complainant

                                                  Versus

Mata Sarswati Institute of Nursing Education, Sheela Hospital, Tagore Nagar, Near DMC Hospital, Ludhiana.

…..Opposite party 

                              Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:

SH. G.K. DHIR, PRESIDENT

SH. PARAM JIT SINGH BEWLI, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant               :         Sh. A.B. Sharma, Advocate.

For OP                             :         Sh. R.P. Chauhan, Advocate.

ORDER

PER G.K. Dhir, PRESIDENT

1.                 Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred as Act) filed by complainant by pleading that she took admission in the institute of opposite party in the session 2010-2011 and deposited Rs.17,000/-. After taking admission with the opposite party, the complainant never attended any class, because immediately after taking admission, the kacha house of the complainant’s family members in their ancestral village in District Kangra (Himachal Pradesh), got damaged due to heavy rains. The complainant is from a very poor family. Her father expired many years back and her mother has been working as Class-4 employee on compassionate grounds in the Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana. Since the house of complainant’s family needed urgent repairs, for which huge money was required, as such, the complainant requested the opposite party to refund the fee deposited by her and she did not attend even a single class. The opposite party failed to refund any money to the complainant, despite repeated requests, including writing letter dated 14.07.2010. Legal notice dated 09.11.2011 was sent to the opposite party, but to no effect. The complainant has, thus, prayed that the opposite party be directed to refund the fee of Rs.17,000/- with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e. from 23.06.2010 along with compensation and litigation expenses.

2.                 Earlier Ops were proceeded against exparte and this Forum vide orders dated 31.01.2012 accepted the complaint of complainant by holding that OP will make refund of the amount of Rs.17,000/- within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order with interest. Even OP was directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as costs compositely assessed.  

3.                 On appeal being preferred before Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh, the appeal was accepted vide orders dated 05.11.2014 passed by First Additional Bench of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh through First Appeal No.495 of 2012. The matter was remanded back to this Forum for direction to decide the case on merits by joining Ops in the proceedings from the beginning of the case.

4.                 After appearance, OP filed written statement for claiming that complaint is not maintainable; complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. It is claimed that complainant got admission in GNM Three Year Course  for which fee per year for the said course is Rs.40,250/-. However, complainant deposited only Rs.17,000/- for one year, but did not pay the balance fee of Rs.23,250/-. Complainant did not attend the classes of the said course. Due to negligence on the part of complainant, OP suffered a loss of Rs.1,03,750/-. As per general provisions, once a student gets admission in the college, the college is bound not to fill up that seat. Fee once paid is mentioned as non refundable in the prospectus of the institute. Other averments of the complaint denied for want of knowledge or otherwise.

5.                 Complainant to prove her case, tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex. CW1 along with her mother Smt. Nirmala Devi as Ex. CW2 & documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C4 and then closed evidence.

6.                 On the other hand, counsel for OP tendered in evidence affidavit Ex. RA of Sh. Harpal Singh, General Secretary of OP institute along with document Ex. R1 and then closed evidence.

7.                 Written arguments not submitted by any of the parties. Oral arguments of counsel for parties heard and record carefully gone through.

8.                 It is vehemently contended by counsel for complainant that complainant has not attended the classes and OP has not produced any proof to establish that the seat lying for complainant has not been filed by it and as such, loss to OP is not proved, albeit claimed in the written statement and supporting affidavit Ex. RA of Mr. Harpal Singh. However, these submissions advanced by counsel for complainant has no force because perusal of receipt Ex. C1 reveals that Rs.17,000/- were deposited as new admission fee on 23.06.2010. Though complainant claims that her mother Nirmala Devi sent request Ex. C2 dated 14.07.2010 to Director of institute for informing that complainant cannot pursue the studies due to family circumstances or fall of the kacha house, but no proof adduced qua receipt of this letter Ex. C2 by OP because neither signature of any official of OP there on Ex. C2 and nor the same shown to be dispatched through post. Being so on strength of photostat copy Ex. C2 alone it cannot be held that complainant informed OP regarding the uncontrollable circumstances resulting in failure of complainant to join the course. However, from Ex. C2, it is made out that complainant got admission in GNM course. Duration of that course as per case of OP is three years and that fact not denied anywhere in the complaint or in the evidence produced by the complainant. As per case of OP, fee for the said course for one year is Rs.40,250/- and that fact not refuted and as such, it is obvious that virtually complainant did not pay the entire fee for one year of the said course. Copy of the brochure Ex. R1 is produced on record to show that fee once paid shall not be refunded under any circumstance. In view of this specific clause in prospectus/brochure (Ex. R1), certainly submissions advanced by counsel for OP has force that complainant is not entitled for refund of fee even if she has not studied for a single day.

9.                 As dispatch of Ex. C2 to OP is not established as discussed above and as such, in view of the legal notice Ex. C3 sent through Ex. C4 on 11.11.2011, it is made out that notice for cancellation and refund of the fee virtually was given after one year and four months of deposit of the fee of Rs,17,000/- on 23.06.2010 through Ex. C1. That circumstance further shows as if the seat reserved for complainant on deposit of fee of Rs.17,000/- not filled by OP, so certainly loss bound to occur to OP for keeping the seat vacant. So case put forth by OP regarding sufferance of loss due to non attending of classes/course by the complainant is believable. Fault lays with complainant in not attending classes and sending the intimation for cancellation at earliest and as such, in view of the terms and conditions of Ex. R1, OP justified in not refunding the deposited amount of Rs.17,000/- because the same is in consonance with terms and conditions of the contract, which are contained in brochure/prospectus, copy of which produced on record as Ex. R1. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP and nor OP adopted any unfair trade practice because they acted as per Ex. R1.

10.               As a sequel of above discussion, complaint dismissed without any order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                                         (Param Jit Singh Bewli)                      (G.K. Dhir)

                                         Member                                              President

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated:10.03.2017.

Gobind Ram.