Kerala

Kannur

OP/278/2006

A.T .Thomas , Ezuthupallical house, Arabi Po. Uliyil , KNR - Complainant(s)

Versus

Principal , Rani Jacob.Holy Matha Hospital and college Of Nursing, Kuruppilangad.Kottayam - Opp.Party(s)

30 Apr 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. OP/278/2006

A.T .Thomas , Ezuthupallical house, Arabi Po. Uliyil , KNR
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Principal , Rani Jacob.Holy Matha Hospital and college Of Nursing, Kuruppilangad.Kottayam
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. GOPALAN.K 2. JESSY.M.D 3. PREETHAKUMARI.K.P

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

30.04.2008 By Sri.K.Gopalan,President. This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the consumer protection Act for getting an order directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the loss and sufferings. The case of the complainant in brief are as follows: The complainant attracted by the advertisement in newspapers contacted the opposite party and on payment of Rs.200/- by money order received the prospectus and admission memo from the opposite party for the purpose of admission to the opposite party's institution. Believing the assurance given in the prospectus with respect to the course he admitted his daughter in HolyMatha Hospital & College of Nursing,Kottayam for the 3 years course of General Nursing and the Midwifery course. After 5 months class the complainant was informed by the opposite party that the course had been completed so that remit the full amount and collect the certificate. Fee for the course shown in the prospectus was only Rs.4750. But the opposite party collected Rs.8150/- from the complainant. More over Opposite party insisted to give Rs..2000/- as commission for giving opportunity for practice. He returned back since he was not having money. Hence this complaint for compensation on the ground of unfair trade practice. Though notice was served, opposite party did not care to appear before this Forum. The only evidence PW1 A.T.Thomas and Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the complainant. The 1st important question to be decided from the very outset is whether this forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. Since the cause of action arose in Kottayam. Nothing has brought out in evidence to show that the cause of action fully or partly arose within the jurisdiction of this Forum. The opposite party resides and running institution in Kottayam there is no evidence to show that any institution belonging to opposite party has been working within the jurisdiction of this Forum. Hence this Forum is helpless to entertain this complaint for want of territorial jurisdiction. Under this circumstances there is no meaning in going to the merit of the complaint the only way open before the complainant to take back the complaint and to approach the proper Forum. In the result, this complaint is disposed off by reserving the right of the complainant to file the complaint before the proper Forum.. Dated this the day of April 2008 President Member Member




......................GOPALAN.K
......................JESSY.M.D
......................PREETHAKUMARI.K.P