BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
ERNAKULAM.
Date of filing : 17/06/2011
Date of Order : 22/10/2011
Present :-
Shri. A. Rajesh, President.
Shri. Paul Gomez, Member.
Smt. C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
C.C. No. 320/2011
Between
1. C.M. Devassy, | :: | Complainants |
Chandanathil House, Karukutty. P.O., Ernakulam Dt., Pin – 683 576. 2. Eby Devassy, S/o. C.M. Devassy, Chandanathil House, Karukutty. P.O., Ernakulam Dt., Pin – 683 576. |
| (Compts. by Adv. T.C. Krishna, 'Sree Sadan', Azad Road, Kaloor, Kochi - 17) |
And
1. Reliant Institute of Communication Training, | :: | Opposite parties |
2nd Floor, Colton House, Bank Road, Opp. St. Antony's Church, Kaloor, Kochi – 17. 2. The Chairman, Hindustan Educational Institutions, Hindustan Gardens, Behind Nava India, Coimbatore. |
| (Service against op.pty 1 is not completed)
(Op.pty. 2 absent) |
O R D E R
A. Rajesh, President.
1. The facts of the complainant's case are as follows :
The complainants had remitted an amount of Rs. 10,000/- by way of demand draft favouring the 2nd opposite party drawn on Federal bank, Coimbatore towards advance for admission to mechanical engineering course. The demand draft was handed over to the 1st opposite party, the agent of the 2nd opposite party at Kerala. For one or another reason, the complainants could not proceed with the admission proceedings for no fault of theirs. Thus, the complainant requested the opposite parties to refund the amount. Later, the complainant issued two letters to the 2nd opposite party raising the very same demand, but there was no response. The lawyer notice as well was not responded to by the opposite parties. Thus, the complainant is before us seeking direction against the opposite parties to refund the amount together with compensation and costs of the proceedings.
2. In spite of service of notice from this Forum, the 2nd opposite party did not appear for their own reasons. Notice of the 1st opposite party has not been completed. No oral evidence was adduced by the complainants. Exts. A1 to A5 were marked on their side. Heard the counsel for the complainant.
3. Ext. A5 letter dated 23-09-2011 issued from the Federal Bank, Aluva goes to show that the demand draft drawn in favour of the 2nd opposite party has not claimed by them. Since the complainant voluntarily withdrew his application for admission for Mechanical Engineering Course applied for naturally he is entitled to get the advance amount refunded. Admittedly, the demand draft No. 127529 dated 30-06-2009 for Rs. 10,000/- favouring the 2nd opposite party was taken by the 2nd complainant. Legally, the complainant is entitled to get the demand draft cancelled and refunded. In view of the above, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the Federal Bank, Aluva branch shall take necessary steps to cancel the demand draft and disburse the money to the 2nd complainant. It is made clear that if the 2nd complainant fails to submit the original demand draft before the Bank, the Bank can obtain indemnity for the above amount.
The order shall be complied with, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 22nd day of October 2011.
Sd/- A. Rajesh,President.
Sd/- Paul Gomez, Member.
Sd/- C.K. Lekhamma, Member.
Forwarded/By order,
Senior Superintendent.
A P P E N D I X
Complainant's Exhibits :-
Exhibit A1 | :: | Copy of the receipt dt. 01-07-2009 |
“ A2 | :: | Copy of the letter dt. 08-10-2009 |
“ A3 | :: | Copy of the letter dt. 08-03-2010 |
“ A4 | :: | Copy of the lawyer notice dt. 15-05-2010 |
“ A5 | :: | Copy of the certificate dt. 23-09-2011 |
Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil
=========
