httBEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION ATHYDERABAD

F.A.No.508 OF 2009 AGAINST C.C.No.437 OF 2007 DISTRICT FORUM-IIVISAKHAPATNAM

Between:

Balla Institute of Technology &
Management, rep. by its Director
Mr.S.Balla R/o Eswar Paradise,
Dwarakanagar,Main Road,
Visakhapatnam.

A N D

1.                 

2.             

                                                               Counsel for the Appellant            

Counsel for the Respondents

QUORUM:  

AND

SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

WEDNESDAY THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY

Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Hon’ble Member)

                                       1.    

2.     `75,000/- towards admission fee and tuition fee.     MysoreUniversityPunjabUniversity    

3.        As per the prospectus the opposite party had given a placement guarantee card and laptop to the second complainant on the first day of his admission and he rejected to receive the laptop stating that he would receive it after consulting his father. 

The complainant no.2 had joined the opposite party institute on 6.9.2006 and paid the fees of`75,000/-      

4.     

5.    

6.                                                              

7.    

1.    

2.    

3.    

8.    `75,000/- on 6.9.2006 for admission into two year MBA degree course offered by the opposite party institute.     

9.     

“Most B Schools tried to deceive by using the sentence “100% placement assistance”.   

10.   

“BITM has solutions for all the above problems. 

11.      

12.     

13.   DeemedUniversity,Salem    

14.     

15.   Punjab The National Commission had referred to its earlier decisions and held as,

They cannot be allowed to take plea of their advertisement and condition contained therein to deny refund of fees and other charges to the petitioner/complainant. In fact, we find that the present case is squarely covered by the two judgments relied upon by the counsel for the petitioner/complainant. It is mentioned in the two judgments supra that the guidelines issued by the United Grants Commission also provide for refund of fees in cases such as the present one before 

16.   

In the circumstances, the revision of the complainant/petitioner is allowed and the impugned order passed by the State Commission is hereby set aside. Respondent No.1 – Institute is accordingly directed to refund the entire amount of fees deposited by the complainant with it at the time of taking admission along with Rs.7,500/- which was received by the Institute from Respondent No.2- University. However, Respondent No.1 – Institute shall be free to deduct a processing fee of not more than Rs.1,000/- while refunding the amount of fees to the complainant. The refund of fees after deducting processing fee upto Rs.1,000/- shall be paid by the Respondent No.1 – Institute within a period of 3 weeks from the date of this order failing which, the Respondent No.1 – Institute shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. till the date of actual refund. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs.

17.    Therefore, we are of the opinion that the a sum of`70,000/- to the complainant and costs of`2000/- would be proper and reasonable amount to be awarded to the complainant. Accordingly the relief granted by the District forum is modified by reducing the fee to be refunded from`75,000/- to `70,000/-  `2,000/- and `10,000/- is set aside.

In the result the appeal allowed.  `70,000/- along with costs of`2000/- to the complainant. `10,000/- is set aside.    

KMK*