Andhra Pradesh

Chittoor-II at triputi

CC/79/2013

V.Parameswar Reddy S/o. V.Ella Reddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

NRI Academy, Centre for Global Education, - Opp.Party(s)

D.Reddeppa Reddy

23 Feb 2015

ORDER

                                                                                  Date of filing:  06.12.2013

                                                                                   Date of Disposal: 23.02.2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, TIRUPATI.

PRESENT: Sri.M. Ramakrishnaiah, President

    Smt.T. Anitha, Member

                                  

MONDAY THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN

 

C.C.No.79/2013

 

Between

 

V. Parameswar Reddy,

S/o. V. Ella Reddy aged about 40 years,

Hindu, residing at Nadimpalli Village,

Peddamallela Post, Rompicherla Mandal,

Chittoor District.

                                                                                            ...Complainant.

And

 

1. NRI Academy, Centre for Global

Education, rep. by its principal /

Authorized Signatory,

Muthyalareddipalle Branch, Tirupathi Town,

Chittoor District.

 

2. NRI Academy, Centre for Global

Education, rep.by its Authorized Signatory,

Main Admn Off: Ring Road, Opp.Vidyanagar,

1^st Lane, Guntur-7, Andhra Pradesh.

                                                                  

                                                                                                …Opposite parties.

 

          This complaint coming  before us for final hearing on 04.02.15 and upon perusing the complaint and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing Sri.D.Reddeppa Reddy, counsel for the complainant and Sri.I.Siva Kumar, counsel for the opposite parties, and having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following.

                                                       ORDER

                              DELIVERED BY T.ANITHA, MEMBER

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

         

           This complaint is filed under Section-12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986,

complaining deficiency of service on part of the opposite party and prayed this Honorable Forum to pass an order directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs. 15,200/- with interest and to pay Rs. 50,000/- towards compensation for the deficiency of service and to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses and to pass such other orders and as this Honourable Forum may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.  .

          2.  The brief facts of the case are:-  The complainant who is the father of one V. Naveenkumar Reddy joined his son in an intermediate course for the academic years 2013-2014 in the college of opposite party No.1 and second opposite party No.2 is their  main office  and they collected Rs. 15,200/- in total on 01.06.2013 which includes Rs.200/- was collected towards application fee, towards miscellaneous receipt Rs.3,000/-,admission fee of Rs.2,000/- another 2,000/- was collected on 06.06.2013 , and 8,000/- was collected towards tuition fee .

          3.  The complainant further submits that his son attended for the classes and stayed in a hostel only for three days from 16.06.2013 to 18.06.2013. After three days of his stay because of poor quality of food and atmosphere he fell ill and he left the college and went to his village as he is unable to adjust in the college of the opposite parties as they failed to provide facilities assured by them at the time of admission.

          4.  Then the complainant had approached the first opposite parties and requested to refund the amount paid by him at the time of admission after deducting necessary charges for the three days of stay in the hostel of his son. But the opposite parties instead of several requests made by him fails. The opposite party fails to refund the same. Hence he caused the legal notice on 03.10.2013 calling upon the opposite parties to refund the amount paid by him. After receipt of the notice also they fail to refund the same. Hence he filed the present complaint. The opposite parties came in to appearance by filing the written version of OP No.1 same was adopted by OP No.2 and contended that one V.Naveenkumar Reddy son of  the complainant joined in the course of intermediate course  and he paid a sum of Rs.15,200/- to them and also submits that as per the terms and conditions of the institutions the amount paid towards admission fees of Rs. 3,000/- and an amount paid towards course material  of Rs. 3,000/- will not be refundable and further stated that the said student stayed in the hostel for five days. So the bill towards an accommodation in the hostel i.e. Rs.300/- per day, for five daysRs.1,500/- in total an amount of Rs.7,500/-is not refundable and also stated that by deducting the above 7,500/- they are ready to refund the remaining amount Rs. 7,700/- to the complainant as they are ready to refund the amount and intimated the same to the complainant several times to receive the amount but the complainant failed to receive the above  said amount. Hence there is no deficiency of service on part of them. Hence this complaint liable to be dismissed.  

          5. The complainant filed his evidence on affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A6 and M.Sreedhar, S/o. M.V. Krishna, CEO of NIR Academy filed his evidence on affidavit and marked Exs. B1 and B2. Both parties filed their written arguments, oral arguments were heard.

         6.     Now the points for consideration are:-

          (i). whether there is any deficiency of service on part of the opposite parties? 

          (ii). whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

          (iii). To what result?

          7.  Point No.(i):- There is no dispute regarding the admission of the son of the complainant in opposite parties institution into intermediate course for the academic years 2013-2014 because same was admitted by the opposite parties. The main contention of the complainant is that he joined his son in the college of opposite parties in first year intermediate course of M.P.C. in the opposite party No.1 of college which is runned by second opposite party and he paid a sum of Rs.15,200/- as demanded by the opposite parties.  At the time of the admission of his son into the college the opposite parties assured that the food and atmosphere in the campus is very good and will provide healthy atmosphere for students in their campus. By believing the words of the opposite parties the complainant joined his son in the college of opposite parties. But his son stayed in the hostel and attended for classes only for three days and further contended that his son discontinued his course in the college of the opposite parties due to the poor quality of food and atmosphere he fell ill. Hence he left the college to his Village as the opposites parties failed to provide the facilities as assured by them at the time of admission.

          The complainant further stated that he approached the opposite parties and requested them for refund of amount paid by him by deducting three days course fee. But the opposite parties failed to pay the same till today and stated that the opposite parties never made any communication to him as they are ready to refund the amount as contended by them. In order to prove his contention that he paid the amount to opposite parties he got marked Ex.A1to A5 fee receipts given by the opposite parties at the time of admission;

          The contention of the opposite parties contended as per the terms and conditions of their institution, the amount paid towards admission fees of  Rs.2,000/- under Ex.A1 and paid towards material Rs.3,000/-under Ex.A2 will not be refundable and stated that the son of the complainant stayed in the hostel  for five days only, in order to prove their contention they filed attendance register under Ex.B2 clearly shows that he stayed for five days in the hostel and stated that the bill towards hostel fee per day is Rs.300/- total 1,500/- for five days is also not refundable to the student. Hence by deducting  7,500/- in 15,200/- (15,200-7,500=7,700) they are ready to pay the balance of Rs.7,700/- since same was intimated several times to the complainant but the complainant fail to receive the same and contended that there is no deficiency of service on part of them. By perusing the evidence placed before us by both the parties that the complainant paid Rs.15,200/- under Ex.A1 to A5 which is not disputed by the opposites parties and Ex.B2 clearly shows that the son of the complainant attended for classes for five days only, the next contention of the opposite parties that they have intimated several times to the complainant that they will repay the balance is not acceptable because in order to prove their contention they failed to place any evidence on record. Hence in absence of any documentary proof that they informed the complainant several times cannot be accepted. Hence we are of the opinion that there is a clear deficiency of service on part of the opposite parties, if at all there is any bonafides on part of them they might have taken steps to pay the same but they failed to do the same. Hence this point is answered against them.

          8.  Point No.(ii):-  The complainant paid an amount of Rs.15,200/- in total under Exs.A1 to A5 the receipts issued by the opposite parties reveals that the opposite parties collected application fee under Ex.A1 Rs.200/- and receive R.C.deposit for Rs.2,000/-  under Ex.A2 and Rs.3,000/- towards  course material under Ex.A3, and collected Rs.2,000/- towards admission fee under Ex.A4 and collected Rs.8,000/- towards tuition fees under Ex.A5 in total (200+2,000+3,000+    2,000+8,000=15,200). The fee for five days stay in the hostel per day is Rs.300*5= 1,500/- the opposite party contended that the application fee Rs.200/-, admission fee Rs.2,000/- and material fee Rs.3,000/- is not refundable because the complainant never stated anywhere in the affidavit and the complaint that he has not received any material from the opposite parties if so the material can be used for his further studies. Hence the above said amount is not refundable. Hence the complainant is entitled for (15,200-[200+2000+3000+1500]=8,500) in total Rs.8,500/-(Eight thousand five hundred only). Hence the opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.8,500/- with interest 9% per annum from the date of the complaint i.e. on 06.12.2013 till the date of realization. The opposite parties further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation because they have unnecessarily created mental agony and torture by withholding the amount of the complainant. The opposite party further directed to pay Rs.1,000/- towards costs. Hence accordingly this point is answered.

          9. Point No.(iii): In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.8,500/- (Eight Thousand Five Hundred Only)with  interest 9% per annum from the date of the complaint i.e. on 06.12.2013 till the date of realization. The opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- towards compensation and to pay Rs1,000/- towards costs. The opposite parties directed to comply with the order within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.       

       Typed by the stenographer, to the dictation and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum this the 23^rd day of February, 2015. 

        Sd/-                                                                                            Sd/-

Lady Member                                                                          President

                                                 

                                                    APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

  WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BOTH SIDES

 

PW-1: V.Parameswar Reddy S/o. V.Ella Reddy (Affidavit filed).

RW-1: M.Sreedhar S/o. M.V.Krishnaiah and Another (Affidavit filed).

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT/S

 

Exhibits	Description of Documents
Ex.A1.	Copy of receipt No.29903 dated 01-06-2013 is Rs.200-00 (towards application fee receipt)
2.	Copy of receipt No.13829 dated 06-06-2013 is Rs.2,000-00(towards miscellaneous receipt)
3.	Copy of receipt No.13929 dated 06-06-2013 is Rs.3,000-00(towards miscellaneous receipt)
4.	Copy of receipt No.29903 (Temporary receipt is Rs.2, 000-00.
5.	Copy of receipt No.63078(receipt) dated 06-06-2013 Rs.8,000-00
6.	Postal acknowledgments (2) in Number Dt: 14.10.2013.

        

 

 

       EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY/S

      

Exhibits	Description of Documents
Ex.B1.	Application form of the son of the complainant filed on behalf of the Opposite Parties. Application No. 18930.
2.	Attendance register filed on behalf of the Opposite parties.

 

 

                                                                                                     Sd/-

                                                                                                 President

 

                    

                                                          // TRUE COPY //

// BY ORDER //

 

Head Clerk/Sheristadar,

                                           Dist. Consumer Forum-II, Tirupati.

 

Copies to: - 1. The Complainant.

                   2. The Opposite parties.