Date of Filing : 26.11.2008
Date of Order : 25.07.2011
BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
SESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE – 560 020
Dated 25th JULY 2011
PRESENT
Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A., LL.B. (SPL) …. President
Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A., LL.B. …. Member
COMPLAINT NO. 2666/2010
Varoon Joshua.R.C.
Aged 27 years,
S/o. Mr. Orlando Ravishankar,
R/at: House No. 2, Chacko,
Lewis Road, Cooke Town,
Bangalore – 560 005. ……. Complainant
V/s.
Jamboree Education Pvt. Ltd.,
A Company registered under the
Companies Act, 1956 having their
Registered Office at Building No. 191,
9th Cross, 1st Stage, CMH Road,
Opp. Citibank ATM, Indiranagar,
Bangalore – 560 038. …… Opposite Party
ORDER
(By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale)
This Complaint is filed by the Complainant u/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
2. Brief facts of the case are that being induced by the various advertisements by the OP, Complainant had enrolled with the OP for GMAT coaching and admission counseling on 11.10.2008 and 16.12.2008 respectively for the purpose of taking examination on 23.01.2009. By trusting & believing the OP, Complainant made payment of fees of Rs.10,000/- on 16.12.2008 & Rs.19,214/- on 19.12.2008, totaling to Rs.29,214/- for Admission Counseling. Apart from the above, Complainant has also paid Rs.21,348/- against the tutorials. Complainant was unsuccessful at the GMAT exam on 23.01.2009 as he had failed to get the desired score. Thereafter, Complainant decided to take GMAT exam again on 12.09.2009 for which OP agreed to carry forward the amount of Rs.29,214/-. Complainant did not claim refund of fees because OP extended the admission counseling to the subsequent GMAT as the service of availing admission counseling was not availed. Complainant did not fare well even at the 2nd attempt and as such fell short of the marks generally required to get into any of the prestigious institutions. Then he chosen not to take-up GMAT again and approached the OP for refund of amount paid by him. OP assured him that refund will be made at the earliest once they or complainant find replacement. To the shock of the Complainant, OP informed vide e-mail dtd. 01.02.2010 that there was no assurance given by them for refund of amount. His repeated requests to the OP to refund the amount went in vain. In spite of service of legal notice, OP remains silent. Hence filed a Complaint seeking direction to the OP to refund Rs.29,914/- paid by him for admission counseling along with interest and cost.
3. OP has filed version stating that OP is an Education Training Company having its head office at New Delhi and two branches in Bangalore. OP trains students to take-up entrance examination for joining Foreign Universities for MBA, MS etc. Complainant enrolled for GMAT training course on 11.10.2008. He had made payment of Rs.29,214/- for admission counseling in two installments i.e., Rs.10,000/- on 16.12.2008 & Rs.19,214/- on 19.12.2008. The allegation that Complainant lured and misrepresented by the OP is denied. The averment that Complainant did not avail service of the admission counseling is false. It is submitted that Complainant had availed services of admission counseling from the OP and OP has not made false promise to the Complainant or indulged in any unfair trade practice. Since the Complainant scored low on the GMAT, he started demanding refund of the fee paid for admission counseling. As the Complainant availed services from the OP, the question of refund of fees does not arise. It is the policy of institution not to refund the fees to the students. In terms & conditions of the enrolment form, it is mentioned that fees once paid is not refundable. Complainant by agreeing the same joined the course. In spite of this Complainant has filed false complaint to harass the OP. It is denied that there was any deficiency of service on the part of OP. Complainant is not entitled for any relief. Therefore, OP prayed to dismiss the Complaint.
4. Arguments are heard.
5. Points for consideration are as under:
(1) Whether the Complainant has proved deficiency of service on the part of OP ?
(2) Whether the Complainant is entitled for refund of fees of Rs.29,214/-?
(3) What relief & order ?
REASONS
6. It is the admitted case of the Complainant that Complainant has paid Rs.10,000/- on 16.12.2008 under Bill-cum-Receipt and Rs.19,214/- on 19.12.2008 to the OP. As regards payment is concerned, there is no dispute. As per the case of the Complainant, he has taken training from the OP and also appeared for the exam on first attempt in January 2009 and he had failed to get desired score. Again he has appeared for the GMAT exam on 12.09.2009 as second time and during that time also he availed short of marks generally required to get into any of the prestigious institution. When this is the case, how can the Complainant entitle for refund of the amount paid by him. Complainant has availed services from the OP for the amount paid by him. As per terms & conditions in the Enquiry / Enrollment Form of the OP, it is clearly mentioned that “fees once paid is not refundable”. The OP has produced Enquiry / Enrollment Form along with terms & conditions. This is called standard format and terms & conditions mentioned in the said Form will be binding on the Complainant. On this proposition of Law, Learned Counsel for the OP has relied upon judgement of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 1996 (1) CPJ 37(NC) between Homeopathic Medical College & Hospital, Chandigarh v/s. Ms. Gunita Virk wherein it has been held that “Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 21 – “Revision” – Section 11 – “Jurisdiction” – “Education” – “Medical College” – “Prospectus” – Provision made in prospectus to make fees non-refundable – Whether FORA under the Act has jurisdiction to check validity of such clause in prospectus? – (No). Held: Suffice it to say that FORA constituted under the consumer Protection Act have no jurisdiction to declare any rule in the prospectus of any institution as unconscionable or illegal. It is for the Civil Court to determine this point”. In this case also there is a clear mention in the Enquiry / Enrollment form that the fees once paid is not refundable. Therefore, the Complainant has no right in Law to seek refund of the amount. The authority relied on by the OP is applicable in all force to the facts of the present case. The Complainant has not proved any deficiency of service on the part of OP. Therefore, the question of refund of fees does not arise at all. Taking into consideration of facts & circumstances of the case, it is not a fit case to grant any relief to the Complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Complaint is dismissed.
Send copy of this Order to both the parties free of cost immediately.
Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 25th day of July 2011.
Order accordingly
PRESIDENT
We concur the above findings
MEMBER
SSS
