Per Shri Dhanraj Khamatkar – Hon’ble Member:
(1) This appeal takes an exception to an order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nashik, dated 07.10.2002 in Consumer Complaint No.94/2000.
(2) The facts leading to this appeal can be summarized as under:
The Complainant’s/appellant’s daughter Ms.Isha Acharya had taken admission in the school run by the Opponent/Respondent. While taking admission she had paid requisite fees. The Complainant/Appellant complained to her parents that she was not properly treated in the school. The Complainant further alleged that they met to the Opponents/Respondents and they assured that they would take proper care of Complainant’s daughter. It is alleged that the Complainants sent communication to the Opponent/Respondent. However, there was no response from the school authorities i.e. the Opponents. It is further alleged that their daughter Isha Acharya was terrified and was mentally shocked and she was required to be treated by psychiatric and to pay `24,000/- for the treatment. They further alleged that the Appellants visited the institution for the progress report of first and second quarter. They were informed that their daughter got zero marks in some subjects and she was poor in other subjects. When they insisted for records it was refused initially but shown later on. Complainant further alleged that they were not treated properly. They further contended that the psychiatric advised them to withdraw Ms.Isha from the institution. Hence, Complainant filed consumer complaint praying for the refund of the fees, expenses incurred on the daughter for her education, medical expenses and compensation of losses of their professional income to the tune of `1,80,000/- along with compensation of `20,000/- and costs of the complaint to the tune of `5,000/- total amounting to `4,11,890/-. The Opponent/Respondent contested the complaint contending that the complaint is not maintainable. The District Forum after hearing both the parties and in the light of the evidence adduced by both the parties dismissed the complaint by order dated 07.10.2002. It is against this order that the present appeal is filed.
(3) The matter was on sine die list. The matter was placed before us on 6th July, 2011. On that day we had directed office to issue notice to both the parties. Accordingly notices were issued to both the parties. On behalf of the Opponent/Respondent Advocate Mr.Vinod Sapkal instructed by M/s.Milind Bhise & Co. appeared and filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the Respondents. The Appellant remained absent.
(4) Since the matter is old one, we have proceeded to decide the matter on merit.
(5) Admittedly, Ms.Isha was admitted in the school. It is the contention of the Appellant that as the Complainant refused private tuition Ms.Isha was tortured by the School authorities. However, in the notices addressed to the Opponent/Respondent this ground is not mentioned. Even the Appellant has admitted that the school is a reputed institution. The District Forum has examined the certificate of psychiatric wherein it is shown that Ms.Isha is suffering from depression and phobia. However, the cause of depression is not mentioned. Similarly, the Complainant/Appellant has not proved that the Opponent/Respondent has advised to shift her daughter from the school. Similarly, the academic performance of Ms.Isha was not upto the standard. The allegations leveled by the Complainant/Appellant are not sufficient to infer any deficiency in service on the part of the Opponent/Respondent. The District Forum after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and affidavits has passed the order and we do not find any reason to interfere with the order. In our opinion, the order passed by the District Forum is just and proper and we do not find any substance in the appeal. We hold accordingly and pass the following order:
O R D E R
(i) Appeal is dismissed.
(ii) No order as to costs.
(iii) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 12th October, 2011.
