SMT. RAVI SUSHA  : PRESIDENT

         Complainant filed this complaint  U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking  to get  an order directing  opposite parties (1)  to pay Rs.1,50,000/-  which is the  fees paid  to the opposite parties for the course (2) to pay Rs.2,00,000/-  towards compensation for the loss of one year (3) pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards  compensation for the mental pain. 

Brief facts of the complaint are as follows: In the year 2017 when the  son of  complainant  Ridhun Raj V.  completed his Higher Secondary  School  successfully, he had been attracted by the news paper advertisement of the 1^st OP that he is providing higher study facilities to those students who completed their Higher Secondary  School  successfully . The 1^st OP assured different courses  from different colleges in Karnataka by adding the college authority will arrive at his office for selection procedure and subsequently only they are required to go to Mangalore and  as per the intimation of the 1^st OP that the authorized persons of the 2^nd OP arrived at the office of 1^st OP at Kannur on 11/8/2017 at 10.a.m, and the complainant has filled up the application for the course for  B.Sc (OTT) , the 1^st OP collected all original certificates  of his son and asked him to pay Rs.50,000/- in cash to 1^st OP , when the amount paid, the other man issued a receipt of 2^nd OP above in his son’s name for  an amount of  Rs.25,000/- and the 1^st OP said that he will give receipt for the remaining Rs.25,000/- later.  After two months the 1^st OP called the complainant and informed  him to get ready to go to college at Mangalore with full preparation to say in college hostel and he also will accompany them to  complete the admission process.  On 24/10/2017 the  complainant, his  son and 1^st OP went to 2^nd OP’s college at Mangalore for admission and 2^nd OP asked to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as  balance fees.   Complainant paid Rs.50,000/- to 2^nd OP, pay Rs.5000/-  and issue cheque for Rs.45,000/- in the name of 1^st OP and the  complainant’s son was admitted for  B.Sc (OTT) in the  2^nd OP college that owned and administered by the 3^rd OP.  It is submitted that the status of the course joined by the  complainant’s son was pitiable.  Complainant further stated  that instead of full strength of 20 students for that course, only three students including complainant’s son were joined for that course.  Then the 2^nd OP told him either stay in the hostel and wait for other students joining for the said  course or go to back to native place until their intimation of starting classes. The complainant requested the 2^nd OP to return the original certificates of his son and  the fees paid to them. 2^nd OP replied that  the fees once paid cannot be refunded and had assigned an incredible condition to return the original certificates to pay Rs.1,00,000/- to them as consolidated liquidation.  This demand of the 2^nd OP is illegal and injustice.  The complainant’s son could not study the course B.Sc (OTT) for which he paid the fees because the OPs could not start the offered course.  It is not at all due to any change or failure from the side of the complainant . The complainant’s son could not join  for the said B.Sc (OTT) in any other colleges or any other courses during that academic year. Finally due to certain political pressure and warning through lawyers that the matter will be taken up to the High Court of Karnataka and  their affiliation even may affected. The 2^nd  OP became ready to return the original certificates  of the complainant’s son  in the month of May 2018.  But still the OPs were not ready to refund said amount.  On such failed situation  the OPs are liable to return Rs.1,50,000/-  along with their original certificates.  The act of the OPs is a  clear deficiency in service.  Hence the complaint.

   After receiving notices 1^st OP remained absent and not contested the matter by filing version.  Hence 1^st OP was set exparte.  OPs 2&3 are jointly filed version denying the allegations of the complainant.  It is stated that OPs 2&3 don’t know about 1^st Op and they have not given any authorization letter to 1^st OP  either to advertise , to admit  or to collect any fees from any students and  OPs 2&3 have not gone to  1^st OP’s office for any admission process.  OPs 2&3 submits that on 11/8/2017 the complainant came to the office of the OPs at Mulki, Mangalore to take admission for B.Sc(OTT) course and as an advance for  confirming the seat they paid Rs. 25,000/- for which  receipt No.1164 dtd.11/8/2017 was issued.  At that  time nobody was with the   complainant and the allegation  that the 1^st OP was with the  complainant is false and  denied.  The 1^st OP is a total stranger to OPs 2&3.  As per the complaint the alleged amount was collected by the 1^st OP by misrepresentation and without any authorization from this OPs and hence  they are not liable for the  unauthorized act of the 1^st OP.  Further submitted that  on 24/10/2017 complainant with his son came to the office of the OPs and a fee of Rs.50,000/- was paid for which also receipt  No.1195 dtd.24/10/2017 was issued.  The allegation  that the  OPs have asked Rs.1,00,000/- is not correct and denied.  OPs 2&3 contended that the allegation of the complainant that 1^st OP told the complainant for issuing a cheque for Rs.45,000/- is false and they had no contract or MOU with the 1^st OP.  Further, stated that the claim of the complainant that there were only 3 students is not correct.  There were more students in the course and the course is already started. The allegation that the 2^nd OP  have asked the complainant to stay  in hostel  until  other students come is beyond truth and  hence denied.  The student or his parent  have not approached  the 2^nd OP to change the course or to relieve from the course.  In fact the student was highly irregular in attending the classes though his  other batch mates were regular in attending  the classes and  they have appeared for the exams.  Regarding the return of original certificates these OPs would like to state that as per University regulations all original certificates are to be handed over to the  University for  verification  of eligibility, admission and other administrative requirements. Since the certificates were in the custody of the University which will be returned according to the norms of the University ,the OPs were helpless and they have not delayed  in returning the certificate to the complainant  and hence no liability. OPs 2&3 further submitted that the claim of the complainant  that the B.Sc(OTT) course is not started is not true.  The course is already started  and is in full swing and the students have appeared for exams.  The complainant’s son is already registered for B.Sc (OTT) course in the University and his registration is still alive in the OPs institution and they have  not cancelled his admission.  It was found from the very beginning  that the  student was not interested in B.Sc (OTT) course and was not attending classes regularly thereby giving excuses for his own negligence to escape  from his fault. The student  is still enrolled to this course and so he is welcome to continue the course at no loss of any year of education.  If he is willing this institution, its management are ready to give extra training to the students so that he can continue his 2^nd year of the course as well as he can appear for his supplementary exam for the 1^st year to be conducted in 2018 December-January 2019 on the condition of paying the requisite fees. There is no fault or deficiency of   service on the part of OPs 2&3.  Hence prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

    Complainant was examined as PW1 and marked Exts.A1,A2 and Ext.X1 series.  Exts.A1&A2 are receipt for fees issued by 2^nd OP to complainant.  Ext.X1 series is the course details of 2^nd OP institution.  On the side of  OPs 2&3, the Chairman of 3^rd OP Mr.Eric Christopher Lobo has filed his chief affidavit and has been examined as DW1.

   After that the learned counsel of OPs 2&3 filed written argument note.

   The admitted facts are that the son of  complainant Ridhun Raj V. applied for admission for the course B.Sc OTT(operation Theatre Technology) in the 2^nd OP Institute for education year 2017-2018.  He was admitted as a first year student and submitted original certificate of the student to OPs 2&3. Further Ridhun Raj V. deposited amount of Rs.75,000/- to 2^nd OP on 11/8/2017 and 24/10/2017 as admission and education fees. Further, the student has not  attended the course in the institution of 2^nd OP. The complainant demanded refund of fees and return of certificate submitted.  2^nd OP informed that fees once paid cannot be refunded.  Further, in the month of May 2018, the original certificates of the complainant’s son were returned to him.

   Complainant’s allegation is that he had been attracted by the news paper advertisement of the 1^st OP that he is providing higher study facilities to those students who completed their Higher Secondary  School  successfully .  Further  he assured different courses  from different colleges in Karnataka and thus as per the intimation of the 1^st OP that the authorized persons of the 2^nd OP arrived at the office of 1^st OP at Kannur, and the complainant has filled up the application form of his son Ridhun Raj and paid Rs.50,000/- in cash to 1^st OP on 11//8/2017.  Complainant  alleged that when the amount paid, 2^nd OP issued a receipt of 2^nd OP for an amount of Rs.25,000/- and 1^st OP said that he will give receipt for the remaining Rs.25,000/- later.  Further submitted that after two months as informed by 1^st OP complainant, son and 1^st OP went to 2^nd OP’s college at Mangalore for admission and 2^nd OP asked to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as  balance fees.   Complainant paid Rs.50,000/- to 2^nd OP, pay Rs.5000/-  and issue cheque for Rs.45,000/- in the name of 1^st OP and was admitted the  complainant’s son for  B.Sc (OTT) in the  2^nd OP college that owned and administered by the 3^rd OP.  Complainant further alleged that instead of full strength of 20 students for that course, only three students including complainant’s son were joined for that course and hence the course was not started.  So complainant requested to return the original certificates of his son and  the fees paid to them.  It is stated that the original certificates were  returned to the complainant due to certain political pressure and warning through lawyers that the matter will be taken up to the High Court of Karnataka and  their affiliation even may affected.

    Here it is to be noted that OPs 2&3 vehemently denied  their relation with 1^st OP.  According to OPs 2&3, they  have not given any authorization letter to 1^st OP either to advertise, to admit or  to collect any fees from any students.  Further OPs 2&3 have not gone to  1^st OP’s office at Kannur for any admission process.  OPs 2&3 submits that on 11/8/2017 the complainant came to the office of the OPs at Mulki, Mangalore to take admission for B.Sc(OTT) course and as an advance for  confirming the seat they paid Rs. 25,000/- for which  receipt No.1164 dtd.11/8/2017 was issued.  Further on 24/10/2017 complainant with his son came to the office of the OPs and a fee of Rs.50,000/- was paid for which also receipt dtd.24/10/2017 was issued .  OPs 2&3 contended that the allegation of the complainant that 1^st OP told the complainant for issuing a cheque for Rs.45,000/- is false and they had no contract or MOU with the 1^st OP and  1^st OP is a stranger to OPs 2&3.

     Here as far as 1^st OP is concerned, he remained exparte.  Moreover, complainant has failed to submit a single piece of  evidence to connect 1^st OP either with the complainant or with OPs2&3.  Complainant also failed to substantiate his allegation about the payment of Rs.30,000/- and given a cheque of Rs.45,000/- to 1^st OP.  Hence we cannot believe the averment of complainant about 1^st OP.

     Coming to the merits of the matter, it is stated that the original certificates were returned to the complainant.  The complainant’s son had not attended the college of the 2^nd OP.  It is contended by OPs 2&3  that they were running educational institutions for various courses and the three courses namely B.Sc Medici Laboratory Technology , B.Sc Medical Imaging Technology and B.Sc(O.T.T) have a common syllabus  in the 1^st year and there were more students in the course and the course was already started in the academic year 2017-18 and the same was completed.  OPs 2&3  contended that the complainant’s son was highly irregular in attending the classes though his other batch mates were regular in attending  classes and they have appeared for the exams.  Ext.X1 series also established that for B.Sc Operation Theatre Technology 8 students were joined at 2^nd OP college in 2017 batch.

    From the averment of the complainant, the complainant’s son had not attended the course even for a day.  2^nd OP stated that he was highly irregular in attending the classes though his  other batch mates were regular in attending  the classes.  For proving  this contradictory  statements, OPs 2&3 could have prove their version by submitting attendance  register of the students, before the commission.  From the available evidence, there is no evidence to show that the complainant’s son Ridhun Raj V has attended the course B.Sc (OTT)at 2^nd OP institution and was irregular in attending classes.

   From the contention of OPs 2&3, shows that the entire fees belongs to the college was collected from the  student, if the student withdraws from the  course in case the seat had fallen vacant and had been filled up by another candidate.  From Ext.X1 series  8 students out of 20 seat joined in B.Sc OTT course and in the other courses also students joined.  Hence it cannot be said that the OPs 2&3 suffered financial loss due to withdrawal of the complainant’s son in the initial of the  educational years.

   Considering the circumstances and the foregoing  reasons, we are of the opinion that the OPs 2&3 could not have denied  refund of fees to the complainant’s son.  It cannot be said that due to act of the complainant, the OPs 2&3 suffered any financial loss.  Hence we are of the opinion that complainant is entitled to get refund of the fees paid to  OPs 2&3 college as per Ext.A1&A2  document with compensation for the mental agony and hardship.  Since complainant  failed to establish the allegation against 1^st OP., there is no order against 1^st opposite party.

   In the result complaint is allowed in part.  Opposite parties 2&3 are directed to refund Rs.75,000/- to the complainant together with Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and financial loss.  Opposite parties 2&3 shall comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which interest @12% per annum will have to be paid  by the opposite parties 2&3 over the awarded amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the date of  order till realization .  Complainant is at liberty to execute the order by filing execution application against opposite parties 2&3 as per provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.

 Exts:-

A1&A2-Copy of receipts Dtd.11//8/2017, 24/10/2017

X1 series-B.sc course details OP college

PW1-Rajan.V- complainant

DW1-Eric Christopher Lobo-3^rd OP

Sd/                                                         Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                             MEMBER                                               MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                       Molykutty Mathew                                    Sajeesh K.P

eva           

                                                                        /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR