Kerala

Trissur

CC/19/393

Rehana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Principal Sree Gurukulam Public School - Opp.Party(s)

Vinoy.K.D

17 Aug 2020

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
AYYANTHOLE
THRISSUR-3
 
Complaint Case No. CC/19/393
( Date of Filing : 11 Jul 2019 )
 
1. Rehana
Ponneth House,P.O.Edakkazhiyur,Chavakkad Rep by Ummer Haji
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Principal Sree Gurukulam Public School
Guruvayur Eranakulam,P.O.Chittattukara
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. C.T.Sabu PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Dr.K.Radhakrishnan Nair MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Sreeja.S MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Vinoy.K.D, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 17 Aug 2020
Final Order / Judgement

 

O R D E R

By  Sri.C.T.Sabu, President

          The case of the complainant is that the complainant Rahana's son Rihan Sheheen was a student of opposite parties' school from LKG up to 6th standard. He passed to 6th standard in the academic year 2018-2019. Up to that period, he has cleared full amount of tuition fees and other charges every year. On 07/05/2018 the complainant remitted an amount of, Rs.37,282/- towards the tuition fees and Rs.5,590/- towards the textbooks, notebooks and uniform charges in advance for the academic year 2018-2019, which comes to the total amount of Rs.42,872/-  paid in a lump sum. But the academic year starts in June only. The complainant, fortunately, got a job as Accounts Administrator in Sequre Technologies, Dubai. The complainant informed the above to the school authorities, and she intends to continue her son's studies at Dubai. For the same, she requested the Transfer Certificate of her son and the refund of the said tuition fees and other charges remitted in advance. The opposite parties agreed to refund the total amount. But when she approached them, the opposite parties gave the Transfer Certificate alone on 31/05/2018, but refused to refund the said amount. So service is deficient from the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint. As she is in Dubai, the complaint is filed through her father, Mr Ummer Haji. He is conversant with the facts of the case and is her lawful attorney.

          2.The opposite party received the complaint notice served upon them. Since there is no representation from the opposite party, they set Ex-parte          

          3.However, the opposite parties set Ex-parte; the burden is upon the complainant to prove the case with supporting evidence.  From the complainant's side, on behalf of the complainant, her father has submitted the proof affidavit in which he affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. He has also produced five documents which are marked as P1 to P5.  Ext.P1 is Receipt for Rs.37,282/-dtd. 7/5/2018, Ext.P2 Receipt for Rs.5,5,90/-,Ext.P3 Copy of lawyer notice dtd. 19/2/2019, Ext.P4 Postal receipt, Ext.P5 Acknowledgement card.

          4.We heard the learnt counsel for the complainant, perused the contents of the affidavit and documents produced in detail. From Ext. P1 and Ext. P2, it is evident that the complainant has paid such amounts in lump sum. In the affidavit, the complainant affirmed that he returned all study and uniform materials as required by the opposite parties. The complainant's son also has not attended the school run by the opposite parties for the academic year 2018-2019, not even for a day. So, the opposite party is not entitled to any fees from the complainant. Even after repeated demands by the complainant for the refund of the total amount, the opposite parties refused to pay stating implausible reasons. The complainant has sent a registered lawyer notice dated 19/02/2019 demanding the refund of the total fees remitted by the complainant. Ext, P3 is the photocopy of the lawyer's notice. The opposite parties received the same and made no reply.

          5. The general principle of law is that no one shall be allowed to enrich by the expense of others. In this case, there is a clear deficiency of service from the part of the opposite parties. They are trying for illegal enrichment. Perusing the documents filed and going through the averments stated in the affidavit by the complainant, we are in the opinion that, the complainant has proved her case. 

          6.In the result, the complaint is allowed, and the opposite parties are directed to pay an amount of Rs.42,872/- (Rupees Forty two thousand eight  hundred and seventy two only) along with interest of 12% from the date of the remittance with the cost of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only) within one month of the receipt of the copy of this order.

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 17th  day  of  August 2020.

 

Sd/-                      Sd/-                                          Sd/-

Sreeja.S                Dr.K.Radhakrishnan Nair         C.T.Sabu

Member                Member                                  President

         

                                      Appendix

Complainant’s Exhibits

Ext.P1 Receipt for Rs.37,282/-dtd. 7/5/2018

Ext.P2 Receipt for Rs.5,5,90/-

Ext.P3 Copy of lawyer notice dtd. 19/2/2019

Ext.P4 Postal receipt

Ext.P5 Acknowledgement card

                                                                                      Id/-

                                                                                       President

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. C.T.Sabu]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dr.K.Radhakrishnan Nair]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sreeja.S]
MEMBER
 

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.