Bihar

Patna

cc/484/2014

Laxman Chandra Panday - Complainant(s)

Versus

P.K. Mishra , Director of Boon Public School - Opp.Party(s)

Adv. Kameshwar Singh

03 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
PATNA, BIHAR
 
Complaint Case No. cc/484/2014
( Date of Filing : 12 Dec 2014 )
 
1. Laxman Chandra Panday
S/o- Jhuri Pandey R/o- Pragati Nagar , New Manpur Ps- Danapur , Distt- Patna
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. P.K. Mishra , Director of Boon Public School
P.K. Mishra , Director of Boon Public School Mohalla Shivpuri Road No-1 Patna
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 03 May 2018
Final Order / Judgement

Present         (1)     Nisha Nath Ojha,   

                              District & Sessions Judge (Retd.)                                                                                         President

                    (2)     Smt. Karishma Mandal,

                              Member

Date of Order : 03.05.2018

                    Smt. Karishma Mandal

  1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
  1. To direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 25,000/- with interest of                         Rs. 2 Lac.
  2. To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- ( Rs. One Lac only ) as harassment.
  1. The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-

The complainant has asserted that his son namely Krishna Chandra Pandey applied for admission in Boon Public School and Rs. 25,000/- was deposited for admission on 27.03.2011 as will appear from annexure – 1. The aforesaid amount was deposited at the request of opposite party no. 1. At the time of taking admission the guardian of other students informed him that whole amount for taking admission is about 3 to 4 lacs. This was confirmed from school. The complainant was unable to deposit such amount and as such he requested the opposite party no. 1 to return Rs. 25,000/- but opposite party no. 1 refused to do the same. The complainant then sent a legal notice containing annexure – 2 but his grievance has not been redressed uptill now.

From record it appears that when the registered notice sent to opposite party no. 1 did not returned unserved then valid Tamila was declared vide order dated 19.07.2017 and one Pritam Kumar Advocate took time for filing vakalatnama and written statement but he only appeared but did not filed vakalatnama as will appear from record of this case.

It goes without saying that there is no counter version of the opposite party in the record and complainant has stated all the aforesaid fact on oath which has not been denied by opposite party by filing written statement. The aforesaid conduct of opposite party clearly discloses deficiency on the part of opposite party.

Hence we direct the opposite party to pay Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) to the complainant within the period of two month from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which opposite party will pay 10% on above mentioned amount of Rs. 25,000/- ( Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only ) till its final payment.

Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- ( Rs. Five Thousand only ) to the complainant by way of compensation and litigation costs within the period of two month.

Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.

                             Member                                                                              President

 

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.