West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/153/2015

Sushmita De (Nath) - Complainant(s)

Versus

Merit Educational Institute Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr.Somasish Panda.

21 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President

and 

Kapot Chattopadhyay, Member.

   

Complaint Case No.153/2015

 

             Sushmita De (Nath), W/o Sanjib Kumar De, Vill. Lalbazar, Vatigora, P.O.+ P.S.+

             & Town-Bankura, Dist. Bankura.. …………..……...……Complainant.

                                                                              Vs.

1)Merit Educational Institute Private Ltd., Represented by Director Santanu Sarkar and Nilima Sarkar, Office address” 40/1 M.G. Road, Sealdah, Kolkata-700001,

2)Residential Address:- MITRA Colony, Station Road, Swapnanir Apartment, D/-2^nd Floor, P.O. & Town Medinipur, Dist Paschim Medinipur,

3)Merit Educational Institute Private Ltd., Medinipur Branch Office, Represented by Branch –in-charge, Akshay Kumar Mondal, S/o Lt. Sankar Prasad Mondal, Vill. Chakmansur, P.O. Enayetpur, P.S. Kespur, Dist Paschim Medinipur……….Opp. Parties.

                                                    

              For the Complainant: Mr.  Somasish Ponda, Advocate.

              For the O.P.               : Mr. Shirshendu Kumar Maity, Advocate.

 

Decided on: -21/12/2016

                               

ORDER

                          Bibekananda Pramanik, President–This is an application under sections 12,13 & 14 of the C.P. Act, filed by the complainant Sushmita De (Nath) against Merit Educational Institute Private Ltd., represented by it’s Directors Santanu Sarkar and Nilima Sarkar and another.

                        Facts of the case, in brief, is that the Opposite party-Merit Educational Institute Private Ltd. is a registered concern under the list of Ministry of Corporate Finance being CIN:-U80902WB2012PTC173544 and dealing with arrangement of different

Cond……………….P/2

 

 

( 2 )

educational course for admission in B. Ed course and other training courses in different Universities against payment of fees.  The said institution published an advertisement in a weekly paper named KARMASANGSTHAAN and after reading out the said advertisement, the complainant came to know from the local office of the opposite party at Keranitola, Station Road, Midnapore town i.e. O.P. no.3 that they will arrange for admission in B. Ed course under affiliated reputed University of India for which the complainant will have to pay Rs.90,000/- towards course fees.  Complainant expressed her inability to make payment of the total fees at a time and requested for installments for payment of the said course fees.  Thereafter the complainant paid Rs.20,000/- on 24/07/2014 to the opposite party and thereafter she also paid the remaining charges of Rs.70,000/- to the opposite party in four installments by issuing four cheques vide no. 000004 dated 02/09/2014 of Rs.25,000/-, vide no.000006 dated 9/10/2014 of Rs.15,000/-, vide no.000009 dated 22/11/2014 of Rs.15,000/- and vide no.0000012 dated 03/02/2015 of Rs.15,000/-. Thereafter the said institution gave an admission confirmation letter in a letterhead pad of Ashu Kishu Memorial and Rabi Kishu Teachers Training Institute, Jharkhand containing the information regarding admission of the complainant in the said college.  Thereafter the complainant went to the said college on 23/08/2015, for confirmation of enlistment of her name as admitted student in B. Ed course for the period of 2014-2015 but she was informed that no such bona fide certificate was issued in her favour from the said college for the aforesaid course.  The complainant then went to the opposite parity’s branch office at Medinipur and requested them either to make arrangement  for admission in B. Ed course or to return the course fees as they received from her but they did not pay any heed to the said matter.  Thereafter the opposite party closed their branch office at Medinipur Town.  Complainant then realized that she has been cheated by the opposite party.  Such act of the opposite party is nothing but  deficiency in service but also an act of unfair trade practice and for such act of the O.P., the complainant has already lost one year of her student carrier.  On 11/08/2015, the complainant came to know from a daily newspaper that the opposite party’s institution has cheated huge number of students in the same way by giving false assurance of admission in B. Ed course.  After receiving such news, the complainant again went to the branch office of the opposite party at Medinipur on 12/08/2015 and found that the office was closed.  Hence the complaint, praying for directing the opposite parties to return  the admission fees of Rs.90,000/- along with up-to-date interest, litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-  and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental pain, agony and  loss of educational carrier.

Cond……………….P/3

 

 

( 3 )

                   Opposite party no.3 duly received notice of this case and she also appeared in this case but subsequently opposite party no.3 did not appear to contest this case.  The case was therefore ordered to be heard ex-parte against her.

                   Registered notice upon opposite party no.1 on it’s office address and residential address was returned unserved with postal endorsement left without address.  Thereafter on prayer of the complainant, notice was published in a local newspaper but in spite of publication of such notice, opposite party-Merit Educational Institute Private Ltd., represented by it’s Directors Santanu Sarkar and Nilima Sarkar did not appear to contest this case for which the case was ordered to be heard ex parte.  Hence, the ex-parte hearing.

                 To prove her case, the complainant has tendered a written examination-in-chief, supported by affidavit, in evidence and she was also examined on oath as PW-1.  During her evidence, three documents were marked as exhibit-1 to 3 respectively.

                In her evidence, the complainant has fully corroborated her case of the petition of complaint.  The documents (exhibit- 1 to 3), relied upon by the complainant, also support her oral evidence.

                So, in view of the oral evidence of PW-1 as well as documentary evidence (exhibit-1 to 3) remaining unchallenged, it is held that the complainant’s case is proved and she is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

                                                  Hence, it is,

                                                     Ordered,

                                           that the complaint case no.153/2015  is allowed ex parte against the opposite parties with cost.  Opposite parties are directed to return the admission fees of Rs.90,000/- to the complainant with interest @ Rs.9% p.a. from the date of filing of this case.  Opposite parties are further directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- and a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant.  All such payment shall be made within a month from this date of order.

                               Let a plain copy of this order be given to the complainant free of cost.

              Dictated & corrected by me

                                Sd/-                                    Sd/-                                          Sd/-

                           President                             Member                                    President

                                                                                                                   District Forum

                                                                                                               Paschim Medinipur