Two daughters of the complainant/respondent herein in this case were the students of the petitioner/OP Institution since June 2005 till March 2010. For the new academic year starting in June 2010, the two students wanted to change their school. But by that time, the petitioner Institution had already collected full tuition fee for the entire academic year in advance in February itself. As per the conditions in the brochure/prospectus of the petitioner Institution, notice of fee was sent to the parents in the month of February to pay the tuition fee within a week. Accordingly, the complaint had also paid a total sum of Rs.1,80,000/- (Rs.90,000/- for each of the two daughters) as fee under several heads. On 09.04.2010, the complainant/students applied for transfer certificates but the OP Institution refused to issue transfer certificates unless they signed the documents by accepting Rs.93,450/- as final settlement. The complainant/students signed the documents under protest but later filed a consumer complaint seeking refund of the balance amount of Rs.86,550/- which was resisted by the OP Institution. On appraisal of the issues and the evidence produced, the District Forum vide its order dated 31.08.2010 partly allowed the complaint of the respondent herein by giving the following directions:- “Complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to deduct tuition fee of Rs.47,500/- out of the fee paid for admission of two daughters of the complainant out of the balance amount of Rs.86,550/- and refund Rs.39,050/- within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which he shall pay interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of this order till the date of payment. Under the circumstances of the case, both parties to bear their own cost.” The matter was carried in appeal by the OP Institution before the State Commission, which has been dismissed by the impugned order passed by the State Commission on 06.10.2010. Challenge in the present revision petition is to this impugned order of the State Commission. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner Institution and perused the orders of the fora below. The broad facts of this case are not under dispute. After considering the regulations of the OP Institution vis-vis the circumstances in which the two students who were daughters of the respondent/complainant were required to be shifted from the OP Institution to another institution have been duly considered by the District Forum in its well-reasoned order by which it has rejected the claim of the complainant for refund of the entire fee paid for the two daughters but has partly allowed the claim considering the fact that the OP Institution has not incurred any expenditure in respect of the two students in respect of various items and hence directed the OP Institution to refund the balance amount of Rs.86,550/- after deducting Rs.23,750/- in respect of each of the two students, i.e., to refund Rs.39,050/- (Rs.86,550/- minus Rs.47,500/-) since Rs.93,450/- had already been refunded by the OP Institution itself out of total amount of Rs.1,80,000/-. This order of the District Forum has been rightly upheld by the State Commission in appeal filed by the OP Institution by dismissing the same. We have not found any infirmity with the concurrent orders of the fora below which are based on undisputed facts and sound reasoning. The revision petition filed by the OP Institution, therefore, is liable for dismissal and the same is dismissed at the threshold with no order as to costs. |
