DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.:1015 of 2009 Date of Inst: 20.07.2009 Date of Decision:.20.04.2010 Sakshi Gupta wife of Sh.Naveen Gupta r/o # 1541, Sector 38-B, Chandigarh. ---Complainant V E R S U SRainbow International School, through Principal, Sector 27, Chandigarh. ---Opposite PartyQUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: Complainant in person. Ms.Nidhi Ayer, Advocate for OP. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Smt.Sakshi Gupta has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OP be directed to refund the entire fee of Rs.9783/- with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of deposit till its realization along with Rs.1 lacs as compensation for mental and physical harassment. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that on the assurance of OP that it had many buses for picking and dropping the children within 20-25 minutes in all sectors of Chandigarh, the complainant got admitted his minor son aged about 3 years in the OP-school. The complainant deposited Rs.5200/- as admission fee, Rs.500/- per month as charges for bus services, Rs.850/- per month as school fee and Rs.1133/- for books. According to the complainant, the school Timing was from 9.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m but the bus of OP picked her child at 8.10 a.m. and dropped at 1.40 p.m. The complainant raised objections regarding this to OP. The complainant was assured by Mrs.Sandhu, representative of the school that her child would definitely reach school and back home within 20-25 minutes as there were some adjustments to be made. According to the complainant, after 15 days the school bus stopped coming to her house for picking up the child. When the complainant enquired from OP, she was requested to adjust for some more time. She was told that OP is arranging for another bus. It has been pleaded that till 08.07.2009 no new bus was added and therefore, the complainant requested OP to refund the entire fee but to no effect. In these circumstances, according to the complainant, she was well within her right to seek refund of the amount paid by her as adequate facility for transportation of her son from her home to school and back was not being provided. So it amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by OP, the factum of admission of the complainant in the school has been admitted. It has been pleaded that school authorities had never assured the complainant that the total journey period for the school and back shall not be 40-45 minutes. According to OP, it has only two buses (1 big bus and other mini bus) and school authorities had clearly informed the complainant about the bus route for picking and dropping the child. It has been pleaded that bus used to start from school in the morning to pick up the children as per its schedule at 8.30 a.m. and therefore, it was impossible to reach Sector 38 from Sector 27 at 8.10 as alleged. The bus picked the child of the complainant at about 8.45 a.m. and reached the school at about 9.25 a.m. and thereafter the bus used to start from school at about 12.40 p.m. and used to drop the child of the complainant at home at 1.15 p.m. It has been denied that any assurance was given to complainant for adding any new bus. It has been pleaded that the complainant has filed this complaint just to withdraw her child and to get the refund of fee deposited by her which is evident from the fact that no other parent has any problem regarding the transport facility provided by OP. It has been pleaded that as per rules, the complainant is liable to be refunded Rs.1000/- on account of refundable security only. In these circumstances, according to OP, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint deserves dismissal. 4. We have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the OP and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 5. Admittedly, the complainant got her child admitted in the OP-school and she deposited a sum of Rs.5200/- as admission fee. She also paid Rs.500/- per month as monthly charges for bus service, Rs.850/- per month as school fee and Rs.1133/- for books. The case of the complainant is that at the time of admission, she was told that there were number of buses in the school. So the child would be brought to the school within 20-25 minutes from his house and there would be no difficulty of transportation. However, when the school started, the complainant realized that her child was being picked up on 8.10 a.m. and was dropped at 1.40 p.m. Thus, the school bus took more than one hour in taking the child to the school and dropping the child to home. In fact, the child of the complainant is 3 years old and it is very difficult for a child of such an age to undertake such a long journey of one hour in the morning and of one hour in the afternoon. Thus, the services of the OP regarding transportation are not satisfactory. This, according to the complainant, amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP. The version of the OP that no assurance was given regarding the transportation of the child within 20-25 minutes cannot be accepted. Had this fact been told to the complainant at the time of admission of the child, the complainant would not have got her child admitted in the OP-school. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to the refund of the amount paid by her. 6. In view of the above findings, this complaint is allowed in favour of the complainant and against OP with the following directions to OP:- i) To refund the sum of Rs.5200/- deposited as admission fee by the complainant. ii) To refund the tuition fee deposited by the complainant after deducting the proportionate amount upto the month of the last date attended by the child. iii) To refund the transportation/bus charges paid after May, 2009. iv) To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-as compensation for mental agony and harassment. v) To pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses. 7. This order be complied with by the OP within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP shall be liable to pay the awarded amount to the complainant along with penal interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 20.07.2009 till its realization besides costs of litigation. 8. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced 20.04.2010 Sd/- (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT cm sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
| | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | , | | 
