BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-

1. The sum of Rs.26,75,000/- along with interest at 12.5% per annum from 27/01/2015 till the date of actual realization.
2. The sum of Rs.25,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and losses suffered by the complainant.

 (c) To award costs and grant such other reliefs.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant who is now working and residing at New Delhi, India, and he is not in a situation to appear before this Commission at all times has executed a Power of Attorney in favour of his father Mr.M.N.Sukesh.  The complaint was presented by the GPA holder of the complainant.

3. On 02.12.2014 the second OP notified the general public through publishing an advertisement in daily newspaper the times of India, Bangalore Edition with regard to the training programme for the recruitment of Trainee First Officers(hereinafter referred as TFOs).  The complainant who has interested in persuing a training programme on these lines evinced interest in the said programme for recruitment of TFOs, has paid Rs.15,000/- towards selection process and for conducting the aptitude test.  His name was shortlisted and selected for training of TFOs by the second OP.
4. It was represented to the complainant by the second OP that since the training is a self-sponsored programme the complainant was required to pay Rs.37,00,000/-.  Accordingly the complainant has paid Rs.37,00,000/- in favour of the first OP. 
5. However to the shock and dismay of the complainant the OPs did not provide any training services.  Upon questioning the same OPs used to offer one or the other evasive answers and services of the training programme was postponed callously on one or the other pretext, having no regard to the carrier prospects of the complainant. 
6. It is the standard condition that any pilot shall have to complete required training programme and be an actual qualified pilot within the age of 35 years.  Seeing the reckless attitude of the OPs and keeping in view of age criteria having no other remedy the complainant lawfully began demanding refund of the amount which was received on the assurance that OPs shall provide training programme services.  
7. In this regard a group of aspiring candidates excluding complainant filed complaint against OPs and other representatives in Crime No.198/2017 in Cubbon park police station.  After registration of the said criminal case the MD Mr.Rajesh Ibrahim Kutti Beevi moved before the Sessions Court on Hon’ble High Court, several bail applications which came to be rejected.  The Cubbon park police have filed a charge sheet against the OPs after completion of the investigation in CC No.11313/2019 and now the case is pending on the file of Hon’ble IV ACMM Bangalore and the court has taken cognizance for the offences punishable u/s 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B r/w sec 34 of IPC.  
8. The complainant has demanded the money back through numerous email communications.  The OP falsely assured that they would refund the money so received and sought time on one or the other pretext.  The Directors of the OP after relentless persistence, constant followup and solely with an intention to avoid the complainant in persecuting the criminal case against them, admitted their fault and assured to settle the entire amount of Rs.37,00,000/- and they have refunded a sum of Rs.10,25,000/- on various dates.  However the directors of the OP again maliciously deceived and cheated the complainant by not paying the balance amount.  In such circumstances, the complainant filed this complaint alleging guilty of gross deficiency in service and has sought the relief for refund of Rs.26,75,000/- along with compensation for the mental agony and losses suffered by him.  
9. After filing of the complaint, the notice was issued to OP1 and 2.  When the notices issued by this Commission was returned with an endorsement that both the OPs left the address, this Commission has directed the complainant to take steps against the OPs through paper publication.  Inspite of service of the notice through paper publication in New Indian Express and Kannada Prabha, the OPs remained absent and they failed to participate in the proceedings.
10. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 11 documents. 
11. Heard the arguments of advocate for the complainant. Perused the documents produced by the complainant.
12. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OPs?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

13. Our answers to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:  Affirmative

      Point No.2: Affirmative in part

      Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

14. Point No.1 AND 2:  These two points are inter related and hence they have taken up for common discussion.
15. In order to prove his contention the complainant filed his affidavit evidence by reiterating all the allegations made in the complaint and placed as many as eleven documents, commencing from Ex.P1 to Ex.P11.  The Ex.P2 to P7 and Ex.P11 are produced by the complainant in order to prove the payment of Rs.37,00,000/- by the complainant in favour of the OPs. Ex.P8 is the FIR, for having registered the complaint against the OPs by the Cubbon park police in CR No.198/2017 on the basis of the information filed by one Gurucharan Prabhakar.
16. The other documents are related to the police papers and the charge sheet submitted by the cubbon park police station after the completion of the investigation.  Ex.P1 is the GPA executed by the complainant in favour of his father.  
17. The allegations made by the complainant and the evidence and the documents relied on by the complainant remained unchallenged.  There is no reason to disbelieve these documents.  It is clear from the evidence and all these documents that the OPs have failed to discharge their obligation to extend training programme which was published in Times of India Bangalore Edition with regard to the training programme for the recruitment of TFOs offered by the OP2.  Although the complainant name was short listed for TFO with second OP they made the complainant to part with Rs.37,00,000/-. The complainant with a fond hope that he would complete TFO and become a pilot, but OPs by their failure to extend agreed service frustrated his ambition.  The OPs have failed to refund the balance amount.
18. The complainant was aged about 30 years when the OPs promised to extend the service in question and due to the OPs acts the future prospectus of the complainant would become lost since standard condition to become a qualified pilot is before completion of the age of the 35 years
19. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant has clearly established the deficiency of service and also the fraud played by the OPs and the mental agony and the financial loss suffered by him.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed in the complaint. Hence we answer point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.
20. Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to allow the complaint in part and direct the OP1 and 2 to refund Rs.26,75,000/- along with interest @ 12.5% p.a., from 27.01.2015 till the date of actual realization and further direct the OPs to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by him and further the complainant is entitle for Rs.50,000/- towards litigation expenses.  The liability of OP1 and 2 is held joint and several and proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. OP1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the amount and directed to refund Rs.26,75,000/- along with interest @ 12.5% p.a., from 27.01.2015 till the date of actual realization.
3. Further OPs are directed to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and financial loss along with litigation cost of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant.
4. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 15% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.27,75,000/- till final payment.
5. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 20^th day of JANUARY, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party;

NIL