Dakarushi Naik filed a consumer case on 21 Nov 2022 against Principal of D.P.S. Sason in the Sambalpur Consumer Court. The case no is CC/83/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 22 Nov 2022.
PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 83/2017
Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,
Sri. Sadananda Tripathy, Member,
Dakarushi Naik,
S/O- Muralidhar Naik,
R/O- LIC of India Chandan Nagar, Near Mandalia,
Po-Khetrajpur,
Dist-Sambalpur. ...………..Complainant
Versus
Principal,
D.P.S Sason,
Dist-Sambalpur-768200. .…………...Opp.Parties
Counsels:-
Date of Filing:13.12.2017,Date of Hearing :XXXXX, Date of Judgement : 21.11.2022
Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT
Issue No.1 Is there any deficiency on the part of the O.P. not refunding the admission fees amounting to Rs. 25,000/- to the Complainant.
When education becomes commodity, certainly this type of problem are brought before the court of law. Both the parties admitted the payment of admission fees and receipt of the fees amounting to Rs. 25,000/- of the O.P. it reveals that admission fees for April 2017 for class XI-XII SC is Rs. 25,000/- the said fact also admitted by the O.P. From clarification sought for by Sujata Lenka, Principal. The O.P. admitted that Rs. 15,000/- as one time admission fees and Rs. 10,000/- to-wards reservation of hostel seat paid to-wards the installment of hostel fees. The O.P. when demanded the refund of admission fees of his daughter, the O.P . remained silent. Although advocate notice was given by the Complainant and admitted the receipt, the O.P. remained silent. In the version also the fact of admission fees of Rs. 15,000/- and 10,000/- hostel fees has not been narrated by the O.P. Here a question arises if the admission fees is Rs. 25,000/- how the O.P. allowed for Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant. In the other hand if Rs. 10,000/- taken then why receipt has not been granted. Manipulation of records are there, only for said reason the O.P. not submitted the admission form of Ajaswee Naik and also hostel admission application, brochure for admission, approval letter of the higher education department. It proves the malafide of the O.P. The Complainant in his letter dated 04.08.2017 categorically mentioned several times the O.P. contracted on 14.07.2017, 15.07.2017, 25.07.2017, 27.07.2017 and 28.07.2017 to the Public Relation officer of the O.P. but it became futile. The harassing attitude of the O.P. compelled the Complainant to knock the door of the Forum/Commission. The O.P. had not cancelled the S.L.C. which proves the commercial attitude of the O.P. A chance was also given to the O.P. for settlement of dispute in Lok Adalat but the O.P. remained aloof.
The issued is answered in favour of the Complainant.
Issue No.2 What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?
From the supra discussion it is apparent that the complaint is entitled for the relief partly. The Complainant is entitled for Rs. 10,000/- out of Rs. 25,000/- admission fees as Rs. 15,000/- is non-refundable and being agreed took the admission of his daughter Ajaswee Naik.
The issue is answered accordingly.
It is ordered:
ORDER
The Complainant is partly allowed against the O.P. The O.P. is directed to refund Rs. 10,000/- with 10% interest P.A. w.e.f. 29.06.2017 within one month of this order. Further to-wards harassment and compensation the O.P. is liable to pay Rs.1.00lakh to the complainant along with litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/-. In case of non-payment the entire amount will carry 12% interest till realisation.
Order pronounced in open court on this 21st day of Nov. 2022.
Supply free copies to the parties.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.