Kerala

Kannur

OP/273/2005

Sivaprakash.K.C., Assistant Engineer . Dooradarsan,Balla.P.O., Kanjangad - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIET, Caltex junction ,South Bazar, Kannur - Opp.Party(s)

G.V.Pankajakshan

21 Aug 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. OP/273/2005

Sivaprakash.K.C., Assistant Engineer . Dooradarsan,Balla.P.O., Kanjangad
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

NIET, Caltex junction ,South Bazar, Kannur
N.I.E.T.,Kanchas Complex, Opp. Indoor Stadium, Rajaji Road, Calicut.4.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

Smt.Preethakumari.K.P. This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to refund Rs 5000/- being the fee remitted with Rs 25000/- as compensation and cost. The complainant’s case is that on 14.7.2005 he had registered to the AMIE correspondence course with the opposite party by paying Rs 5000/- as admission fee. The opposite party informed him that the AMIE section A examination will be conducted in the month of December and study materials will be issued to him wihin a few days. The course was conducted by the Institute of Engineers(India), 8 Gokhale Road, Kolkatta . The reason for registering the course is that the Central Government as well as the State Government had recognized those persons who are in service having diploma in Engineering as Engineering Graduate who had completed the AMIE course, A and B section successfully. As far as the complainant is concerned it is essential for him to complete this course for his promotion. In every year these examination will be conducted in June and December. Because of this he had registered for AMIE course. Soon after one week after registration the opposite party had issued 4 portions which constitute 10% of the actual syllabus. Then after enquiry and demand through telephone the opposite party had again issued two more items which was already issued to the complainant. From enquiry it was informed that the portion will be issued soon, but not issued. Because of the deficiency in service and unfair practice , the complainant’s promotion was extended further for 6 months because he was not in position to appear the examination in the very same year which caused so ,much of injuries and hardship to the complainant. Hence this complaint. On receiving the complaint, notice was issued to both the opposite parties and they appeared and filed version through Adv.M. Govindankutty. Later he had reported no instruction and hence the opposite party were called absent and set exparte. In the version the opposite parties contended as follows. They admitted that the complainant had paid Rs 5000. They had never made any promise to the complainant that the complete syllabus will be issued within few days. The opposite party is only a coaching centre of AMIE since the course has been conducting by Institute of Engineers (India) 8, Gokhale Road, Kolkatha and hence the said institution is supplying study materials. The complainant had never contacted the opposite party after admission and never made any request for study materials. The opposite party sent the remaining study materials for Section A course on 17.11.2005 by Speed Safe Courier and he can very well attend the Section A examination in December 2005 itself. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence he is not entitled to get any relief and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. On the above pleadings the following points were raised for consideration. 1. Is there any deficiency on the part of the opposite party? 2. Relief and cost. The evidence consists of chief affidavit of the complainant and Ext. A1. The admission of opposite party, affidavit and the Ext. A1 shows that the complainant had registered for AMIE course in the year July 2005 for appearing the examination in December 2005 after remitting Rs 5000/-At the time of admission itself the complainant had remitted the entire fee for Section A examination believing the assurance of the opposite party that the study materials will be issued to him within few days. But in the version it is stated that the study materials were issued already to the complainant on 17.11.2005 for the examination which will be conducting during the moth of December. Even though he had registered in the month of July , ie after filing of this complaint before the Forum. So the opposite parties service was deficient and hence they are liable to compensate the complainant for the inordinate delay for issuing the study materials. Because of this the promotion of the opposite party was extended for further 6 months. So we are of the opinion that the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant with an amount of Rs 10000/- with Rs 500/- being the cost. In the result the complaint is allowed partly directing the opposite parties to give RS 10000/-( Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and Rs 500/-(Rupees five hundred only) cost to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Otherwise the complainant is at liberty to execute the order under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-MEMBER Sd/-PRESIDENT APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1. Receipt dt. 14.7.2005 issued by the opposite party Exhibits for the opposite party – NIL Witness examined on either side – NIL Forwarded/by order SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT