Judgement dated 6-06-2017
This petition of complaint is filed u/s.12 of C.P.Act, 1986 by Bishnupada Jana alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party 1) Samir Nath, Director of ‘NIMTT’ Computer technology (P) Ltd.
Case of the Complainant in brief is that he had been admitted to the course of M.Phil (Botany) on 04/06/2011 under the Opposite Party Institute which had been publishing advertisement through various media claiming it as authorized study centre-cum-examination centre of various universities. The Complainant has stated that subsequently the Opposite Party authorities issued a Registration Card being No. NIMTT/UNV/389/0611 by the Registrar, NIMTT, Kolkata and issued an Identity Card and a Registration Card of Manav Bharati University bearing Appl. No. 111547 in favour of the Complainant. The Complainant has further stated that he had paid Rs.68,000/- to the Opposite Party in total including the examination fees on different dates against which the Opposite Party issued proper receipts. It is stated that final examination was held in February, 2013 and since then the Complainant has been knocking the door of the Opposite Party to know the result of the examination as well as to get the mark-sheet of the same but till date he is yet to receive the result. Subsequently, the Complainant made query under the Right to Information Act, 2005 to the Manav Bharati University on 27/11/2014 in reply to which the Manav Bharati University informed him by a letter dated 19/12/2014 that the Manav Bharati University (H.P.) has not affiliated any College/Institution/ Organisation outside the state of H.P. to conduct any examination and run any course as per U.G.C. norms, particularly, the Manav Bharati University did not authorize NIMTT, Kolkata to conduct any examination or run any course. Receiving such information the Complainant lodged an FIR against the Director, Mr. Samir Nath of NIMTT at Pragati Maidan P.S. which was registered as Case No.588 of 2015 dated 30/12/2015 u/s. 420 and 120B of IPC. The Complainant further issued a legal notice through Ld. Advocate upon the respondent on 9/2/2015 in reply to which the O.P. issued a letter dated 1/7/2015 through his Ld. Advocate. According to the Complainant, there is deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party for which he has prayed direction upon the Opposite Party to refund the deposited amount of Rs.68,000/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 12% p.a. from 4/6/2011 till realization, to pay Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation and to pay the cost of litigation. The Complainant annexed photostat copies of the following documents to the petition of complaint :
- Information Brochure
- Registration Card at OP Institute
- Identity Card of Manav Bharati University
- Identity Card of NIMTT
- Money Receipts
- Question paper of M.Phil Examination
- Letter dated 19/12/2014 from Manav Bharati University regarding reply to the query by the Complainant made under provision of Right to Information Act, 2005
- Copy of letter dated 9/2/2015 to the Opposite Party from the Complainant through the Advocate
- Copy of letter dated 1/7/2015 from the OP to the Complainant
10.Copy of notice u/s. 91 of Cr.PC from the Officer-in-charge, Pragati Maidan P.S., Kolkata to the Complainant.
The Opposite Party contested the case by filing written version stating inter alia, that the Complainant did not express the entire facts of matter as the NIMTT is an information and counseling Centre of CMJ University Shilong Meghalaya. It is further stated by the Opposite Party that the Complainant requested the Opposite Party for guidance to pursue M.Phil programme from various Universities and ultimately chose the CMJ University for pursuing the said course and filled up the requisite application form of the said University after rejection form of Manav Bharati University from his own.
It is further stated by the OP that inspite of diligence and care of NIMTT the Complainant could not pursue the M. Phil programme due to suspense of its activity by the Governor of Meghalaya in his capacity as the visitor of the said CMJ University.
It is specifically stated by the OP that the Complainant Mr. Bishnupada Jana is enrolled and registered student vide registration no.80182211112810 under the CMJ University and as such the management of NIMTT is not at all responsible and, therefore, no question of refund arise at all.
The Opposite Party annexed photostat copy of Registration Receipt of CMJ University and Admission application Form of CMJ University filed by the Complainant to the written version.
The Complainant and Opposite Party i.e. both sides adduced evidence followed by cross examination in the form of questionnaire and thereafter affidavit-in-reply.
Main points for determination:
- Is the Complainant is consumer under Opposite Party?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party ?
- Is the Complainant entitled to the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons
Point No.1
In the instant case the Complainant has availed the service provided by the Opposite Party in respect of information and counselling regarding pursuing of M. Phil (Botany Course) under a recognized University and paid Rs.68,000/- towards consideration. Thus he has become consumer under the Opposite Party.
Point No.1 is decided accordingly.
Point No.2
Admittedly, the Complainant has approached the Opposite Party for pursuing M. Phil (Botany) programme and paid Rs.68,000/- accordingly. The Complainant has alleged that the OP claimed the Institute i.e. NIMTT is authorized by Manav Bharati University to conduct the said course including examination but fact remains that the Opposite Party Institute has no such authority since Manav Bharati University informed the same vide letter issued in reply to query made by the Complainant under provision of the Right to Information Act, 2005. On the other hand the OP has stated that the Complainant is a registered student under CMJ University but, the activities of the Institute has been suspended by the Governor of Meghalaya and, therefore, the Opposite Party management is not at all responsible for that. It is stated by the Complainant that he sat for M. Phil examination in April, 2013 but no result has been received so far by him.
The Opposite Party is trying to shed their responsibility for publishing result stating that a suspension order by Governor of Meghalaya is in force and, therefore, they are not responsible for refunding money. However, no document has been furnished in support of this statement. Further, had there been any suspension order by the Governor of Meghalaya in force the Opposite Party Institute would have been responsible for refunding money since the authority to conduct examination by the said Institute would have been suspended. Further had there been any suspension of order by the Governor of Meghalaya then the examination conducted by the OP Institute should be treated as cancelled but the OP never uttered a single word in respect of the cancellation of the said examination. In fact OP failed to substantiate his ground of defence. In a nut shell, the Complainant paid Rs.68,000/- and got nothing in return and the money went in vogue. This is a glaring example of deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.
Point no.2 is decided accordingly.
Point No.3
The Complainant reasonably prayed for refund of Rs.68,000/- since he did not get any service from the Opposite Party. The Complainant has prayed interest @ 12% p.a. on the aforesaid amount and also prayed Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation.
We are of opinion that awarding interest is also a form of compensation. In the instant case no interest on the deposited sum is awarded, instead, an amount of Rs.50,000/- will compensate the Complainant and we further awarded Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of litigation.
Point no.3 is decided accordingly.
In the result the petition succeeds.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That CC/592/2016 is allowed in part on contest with cost of Rs.10,000/- against the Opposite Party.
The Opposite Party is directed to refund Rs.68,000/- to the Complainant, to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation to the Complainant within one month from the date of the order failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of default till the realization thereof.
Since the Opposite Party Institute has been running their business in aforesaid fashion and caused harm to numerous consumer who are not till identified yet. The Opposite Party is directed to deposit a further sum of Rs.50,000/- with the State Consumer Welfare Fund within the aforesaid period.
