BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.SHEELA JACOB MEMBER

SMT.BINDU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.41/2009

Between

Complainant : Sunitha V.S,

Vallianjalil House,

Puthenpeedika,

Munnani, Manimala P.O,

Kottayam – 686 543.

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The Principal,

Al Kareem College of Nursing,

Gulbarga – 585 105,

Karnataka.

(By Adv: C.K.Anilkumar)

2. The Manager,

State Bank of Travancore,

Manimala Branch,

Manimala – 686 543.

3. T.C.Soman,

Thymootil House,

Chennappara,

Thookkupalam,

Kallar – 685 552.

O R D E R

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

Complainant who is a resident of Kottayam District, after completing Plus Two course on 15.06.2008, she went to her father's family house in Idukki District. She approached the 3rd opposite party, who agreed to arrange Nursing admission in Nursing College, Al-Kareem College of Nursing, Gulabarga in Karnataka State. He also assured bank loan for the same and received a commission of Rs.2,000/-. The SSLC Book, Mark list, Conduct Certificate, Transfer Certificate etc. were given to the 3rd opposite party and the 3rd opposite party send them to the college. After some days, the complainant and her father got papers from the 2nd opposite party bank and they went to the bank with the application. The Manager agreed to give loan for them. The 2nd opposite party told them to get ready for travel. On 13.10.2008 the complainant and her father with her uncle booked ticket from Kochi to Gulabarga and vice-versa. Then the Manager of the 2nd opposite party informed that they are not satisfied with the marks of the complainant and so they cannot arrange loan. The complainant obtained 60% mark with 3rd Rank for the examination conducted by the college and the Certificate of the same were produced. So the complainant applied for getting back the Certificates and paid Rs.1,500/- to the 3rd opposite party. The college management directed the complainant to approach directly. So the complainant and her father with her uncle approached the first opposite party, but they demanded 3 lakhs rupees for rendering the documents and threatened the complainant and her family. The 3rd opposite party is responsible for all these difficulties caused to the complainant. This petition is filed for getting compensation and also for getting the certificates given to the 1st opposite party.

2. As per written version filed by the 1st opposite party, they admitted that the complainant had taken admission in their college, but it was through one Mr. Shigin, who was the former Assistant Manager of their college. The petitioner got admission on 07.07.2008 and the original certificates were submitted through Shigin. This opposite party never authorized the 3rd opposite party or any agent on behalf of the college to collect fees or certificates. This opposite party is not known about the 3rd opposite party Mr.Soman. Though the college has received Rs.2,000/- from the complainant, the college spent Rs.7,540/- for registration of her name in Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Science, Karnataka. The college spent the amount on the strong belief that she will join the college and pay the balance fees after obtaining the Bank loan as she stated before the college authorities. For the Eligibility Certificate they spent Rs.1,000/-, for Registration fee Rs.2,000/-, Admission fees Rs.300/-, Social welfare fund Rs.400/-, Sports fees Rs.800/-, Helinet fees Rs.2,000/-, N.S.S fees Rs.40/- and other charges Rs.1,000/- for the admission of the complainant. The college is affiliated to Rajeev Gandhi University of Health Science, Karnataka and recognized by K.N.C and I.N.C. The college gives necessary documents for the student for obtaining educational loan from the banks. The college has no responsibility with bank loan and the college is not aware of the details of the bank loan of the complainant. The complainant and Mr. Shigin visited in the first opposite party's college, but they are not aware of the dealings with the complainant and the 2nd opposite party. The complainant never informed the college authorities about her cancellation of admission and never applied for the Certificate back. The said Shigin informed the college that the complainant had some difficulties in getting the bank loan and she will be joining in the college in the next academic year. The 1st opposite party in any occasion never demanded any money from the complainant. The college is a reputed institution and run by Sayed Barey Educational and Charitable Trust. Only after getting notice from this Forum the college authorities came to know about the fact of this case. The college has submitted the original documents before University for getting original eligibility and registration from University. Immediately after getting notice of this Forum they applied for return of certificate from the University and they got a certificate recently and surrendered the certificate before the Forum. So there is no laches from the 1st opposite party.
 

3. As per written version filed by the 2nd opposite party, it is stated that all the dealings connected with the complainant occurred in Kottayam District and Karnataka State which are totally out of the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Only some private transactions with the 3rd opposite party took place in Idukki District, which is no way connected to the subject matter of this case. The 2nd opposite party is not any were of the transaction between the complainant and the 1st and 2nd opposite party. The Bank never authorized any brokers or mediators for availing educational loan or any another loans from this bank. The delivery of money to the 3rd opposite party and traveling to Karnataka without a second thought is exclusively known to the complainant and this opposite party is not liable for the same. This opposite party never promised the complainant to render educational loan to the complainant. The mother along with the complainant reached the bank and made enquiry regarding the educational loan with copies of certificates . The Bank received the application form and photocopies of the documents. Prima facie it could be seen that the complainant had low marks in English and Mathematics. The next procedure is that the Branch Manager has to send relevant documents of the complainant to the Assistant Manager, Controller of Branches. If only the loan is sanctioned by that authority, the Manager can disburse the loan. Here the fee statement of the college was not produced and it was pointed to the complainant. While internal scrutiny was going on, complainant along with her mother came and took back all the papers submitted by her in 21.11.2008. The mother filed an application stating that she never want to avail bank loan and applied for the documents return. The 2nd opposite party returned all the documents. The complainant unnecessarily dragged this opposite party before this Forum and the petition may be dismissed.
 

5. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?
 

6. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P5 marked on the side of the complainant and no oral evidence adduced from the part of the opposite parties.
 

7. The POINT:- The complainant is filed for getting the original certificate produced before the 1st opposite party at the time of availing admission and also for compensation. The 1st opposite party produced all the certificates before this Forum which were filed in their office by the complainant at the time of admission of the complainant. They are issued to the complainant from the Forum on 13.07.2009. The authorized agent and the complainant submitted that no claim is sought against OP1 and OP3.

8. Complainant was examined as PW1. As per PW1, the 3rd opposite party is one Mr.T.C.Soman residing at Chennapara, Thookkupalam, Idukki District, who is an agent obtained admission for the complainant. All the certificates filed before the college are received by PW1 on 13.07.2009 and so PW1 is not intended to conduct case against the 1st opposite party. The only case is that the denial of the educational loan from the 2^nd opposite party, the education of PW1 was discontinued and she lost a one year because of the same. 2nd opposite party is only responsible for the same. PW1 obtained 60% mark with 3rd Rank in the written examination conducted by the college. The travel expenses for admission is Rs.2,000/- and severe mental agony was caused to the complainant because of the discontinue of education. Ext.P1(series) is the mark list obtained in SSLC and Higher Secondary Examination for the complainant. Ext.P4 is the certificate issued from the 1st opposite party stating that she was admitted in the college for BSC Nursing course and she scored 60%, stood third Rank in their college among the admitted student. Ext.P3 is the income certificate issued from the Village Officer, Ext.P2 is the receipt issued from the 1st opposite party for Rs.2,000/- and Ext.P5 is the copy of the Railway Electronic Reservation slip for the complainant and two others. As per the cross examination of the learned counsel for the 2nd opposite party, PW1 deposed that the 2nd opposite party never introduced 3rd opposite party for arranging loan. The College and Bank are out of jurisdiction of Idukki District. She is now studying for Nursing in Bangalore and never received educational loan from any other bank.

The complainant is not having any dispute against OP1 and OP3 and as per PW1, one Mr.Shigin who is the agent who arranged admission in the college. But it is written in the complaint, that one T.C Soman has arranged admission. As per the cross examination of the learned counsel for the 2nd opposite party, PW1 delivered that the college and the bank are out of jurisdiction of this Forum and the application was prepared by the complainant herself. So we think that the only dispute for the complainant is against the 2nd opposite party, which is the Manager of the State Bank of Travancore, Manimala Branch which is situated in Kottayam District. The complainant is also residing at Manimala, which is in Kottayam District. The college is situated in Karnataka State. There is no evidence to prove that the disputed matter was happened in anywhere in Idukki District. And so this matter is exclusively out of jurisdiction of this Forum.

Hence the petition dismissed. No Cost is ordered against the complainant.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 30th day of October, 2009

                              Sd/-

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN(PRESIDENT)

                               Sd/-

I agree SMT.SHEELA JACOB(MEMBER)

                                Sd/-  
 

I agree SMT.BINDU SOMAN(MEMBER)

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of Complainant :

PW1 - V.S.Sunitha

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Nil

Exhibits:

On the side of Complainant:

Ext.P1(a) - Photocopy of SSLC Marklist

Ext.P1(b) - True copy of Plus 2 Marklist

Ext.P2     - Receipt dated 7.07.2008 for Rs.2,000/- issued by the Ist opposite party

Ext.P3    - Photocopy of Income Certificate

Ext.P4    - Bonafide Certificate dated 7.07.2008 issued by the Ist opposite party

Ext.P5   - Ticket Reservation Slip

On the side of Opposite Parties :

Nil