CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VII

DISTRICT: SOUTH-WEST

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

FIRST FLOOR, PANDIT DEEP CHAND SHARMA SAHKAR BHAWAN

CASE NO.CC/141/20

          Date of Institution:-    24.08.2020

          Order Reserved on:- 29.08.2024

                         Date of Decision:-      26.11.2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sandeep Kumar Jain

R/o H. No.WZ-458, Jain MandirGali,

Palam Village, South West,

Delhi - 110077

.….. Complainant

VERSUS

1. M/s Smart School Education Pvt. Ltd.

61-A, ASF Symphony, Sector-63,

Noida – 201301

2. M/s RNVP Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Known as 121

Building No.C-104, Suite 207, Sector – 65,

Noida – 201301

.…..Opposite Parties

ORDER

Per Dr.HarshaliKaur, Member

1. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are thatlured by the online advertisement of the OP the complainant approached OP-1 to purchaseits software for e-learning content for3^rd to6^thclass students. The complainant alleges that he was assured by OP-1 and their executives that if the services were not satisfactory OP-1 would refund the amount paid by the complainant if the refund application was made within 07 days of installation of services.

2. Assured by the OP-1’sstatements the complainant placed on order and paid Rs.8000/- through account transfer on 01.11.2019 as advance payment towards the total amount of Rs.40,000/-. Hewas to pay the balance amount of Rs.32,000/- in 12 equal payment of Rs.2,267/- as EMI financed by OP-2, which is a subsidiary/associate company of OP-1.The e-learning software of OP-1 was installed on his laptop on 24.11.2019.The complainant has annexed the copy of the invoice (Annexure-IV) which also contains the terms and conditions with his complaint.

3. The complainant states that within 07 days of aforementioned purchase i.e. on 30.11.2019 he telephonically requesting OP-1 to refund the part consideration amount paid by him and cancel the deal and to also retrieve the software as he was unhappy with the services provided by OP-1. The complainant states that he spoke to Ms. Pooja and Mr. Yunus, employees of OP-1 regarding cancellation of the order and refund of Rs.8,000/- advance payment and also arrangement to return the installed software. He was however not asked at any given point of time to send the request email or through any other mode.

4. Despite several follow ups and reminders for cancellation of his order no action was taken by the OP-1 in this regard and OP-1 did not refund the complainant’s money despite their own terms and conditions at point no.12 wherein it is clarified:-

“12. After depositing the fee, a student or the parent may apply for a refund of the same within a period of 07 days by sending an email to customer support@smartschoolonline.in. No student/parent will be eligible for refund after the expiry of the above stated period and the decision of the company in this regard shall be final and binding. The company will issue refund for the eligible cases via cheque or NEFT or the any other mode that the company prefers. Under no circumstances is the company obligated to refund the amount by way of cash.”

5. Further, OP-2 also began pressurising and also claiming the amount from the complainant despite specifically mentioning it to OP-2 that he had cancelled the order with OP-1 via telephone call dated 21.02.2020. The complainant has filed a CD on record with all the recorded telephone calls.He therefore issued a legal demand notice dated 30.01.2020(Annexure-II) to OP-1 and OP-2 on 24.02.2020(Annexure-III)to which OP-1 replied.A copy of this reply is annexed at page no.5 of the complaint in which OP-1 have stated that the complainant has failed to pay the balance amount while using the e-learning content of OP-1. OP-2 also replied to the complainant’s legal notice on 24.02.2020at page no.11 of the complaint stating that the complainant had been facilitated a loan amount of Rs.29,090/- vide loan agreement dated 18.11.2019. The complainant had agreed to repay the loan with interest. However, he had defaulted and did not pay OP-2. They also gave the complainant a last opportunity to pay back the loan amount.

6. Finding no other recourse the complainant filed the present complaintunder section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service. The complainant has prayedfor refund of Rs.8,000/- paid by him on 01.11.2019 towards advance payment and cancellation of any amount paid on behalf of him towards
   Rs.32,000/-.

7. Notice was issued to the OP-1 and 2 who did not appear before this Commission.When the complainant filed adequate proof of service toOP-1 and 2, they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 03.02.2023. The complainant filed ex-parte affidavit in evidence reiterating the statements made in his complaint and thereafter filed his written arguments on record. We have heard the complainant since the OPs are ex-pare and did not appear on the date fixed for final arguments and order was reserved.

8. We have carefully reviewed the facts and circumstances of the case and also perused the documents filed on record by the complainant to substantiate his testimony.

9. We find that the complainant contacted OP-1 desirous of purchasing e-leaning content for 3^rd,4^th,5^th and 6^th classes worth Rs.40,000/-. Agreeing to the terms and conditions of OP-1 the complainant paid  Rs.8,000/- on 01.11.2019 towards part payment of the invoice amount and requested OP-1 for payment options for the balance payment. OP-1 assisted the complainant to take a loan from OP-2 for the remainder amount of Rs.32000/- assuring OP-1 that he would remit the balance payment in instalments.

10. The complainant alleges that at the time of purchase he was assured that he could return the software within 7 days of installation if he was dissatisfied with its performance. He therefore informed the executives of OP-1 over telephone that they should arrange for return of the e- learning software and refund of his money. But OP-1 did not do the needful in contravention of their own terms and condition no. 12 which is part of the invoice annexed by the complainant as Annexure – IV. Moreover OP-2 was also pressurising the complainant to pay the loan amount along with penalties.

11. Though OP-1 and 2 are ex- parte a bare perusal of the invoice annexed as Annexure-IV with the complaint dated 01.11.2019 clarifies that the complainant confirmed his order paying a sum of Rs.8,000/- towards the OP-1 product of e-learning software kit. The complainant states that he sought refund of the same within a period of 07 days telephonically. He has himself annexed the copy of the invoice with the clause no.12 as part of his complaint which clarifies as below:

“12.After depositing the fee, a student or the parent may apply for a refund of the same within a period of 07 days by sending an email to customer support@smartschoolonline.in. No student/parent will be eligible for refund after the expiry of the above sated period and the decision of the company in this regard shall be final and binding. The company will issue refund for the eligible cases via cheque or NEFT or the any other mode that the company prefers. Under no circumstancesis the company obligated to refund the amount by way of cash.”

12. There can be no doubt that the complainant who may have been unhappy with the service provided by the OP-1 had to send an email seeking refund of his advance payment which the complainant in his own testimony states he did not do rather he has done so telephonically on 30.11.2019. There is also no proof on record as to when the complainant allegedly spoke to the executives of OP-1. He has also not provided the transcript of the conversation with the alleged executives to clarify that he had informed OP-1 of his desire to cancel the order placed by him.

13. It is hard to accept that the complainant did not read the terms and conditions before agreeing to them and paying the consideration amount or that he was unaware that he was to send a cancellation email/ letter to OP-1 to cancel his purchase and get the refund of his consideration amount paid. The complainant cannot hide behind the fact that he did not follow the process of refund at Point 12 of the terms and conditions as given in the copy of the invoice which is his own document.

14. In light of the discussion above, we feel constrained to dismiss the present complaint without costs.

15. Accordingly, we dismissed the present complaint leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

• A copy of this order is to be sent to all the parties as per rule.
• File be consigned to record room.
• Announced in the open court on 26.11.2024.