NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/2214/2010

MOSSIUM RACES VICTORIA INSTITUTE OF HIGHER STUDIES - Complainant(s)

Versus

RUPA RANI SHARMA & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. MOHD IKRAM

02 Aug 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 2214 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 12/05/2010 in Appeal No. 142/2010 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. MOSSIUM RACES VICTORIA INSTITUTE OF HIGHER STUDIESThrough its Authorized Person Shri Farooq Ahmed Nawab, Institute of Higher Studies, Victoria Public School, Study Center No. D.L - 111, A-5, Brijpuri Road, Wazirabad RoadDelhi - 110094Delhi ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. RUPA RANI SHARMA & ANR.R/o. E-8, /430, 33ft Road, Nehru Vihar, Near Dr. Kaushik, DayalpurDelhi - 110094Delhi2. THE REGISTRARShri Rawatpura Sarkar International UniversityRaipurChhattisgarh ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. VINAY KUMAR ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :MR. MOHD IKRAM
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 02 Aug 2010
ORDER

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.

Head counsel for the petitioner. The complainant had taken admission in B.Ed. session after depositing a sum of Rs.10,900/- + Rs.10,000/- + Rs.2000/- and was allotted study centre being run by the appellant. The matter had proceeded ex parte against the opposite parties. In appeal filed by the present petitioner, the matter was remanded. It appears that the University had shut down on account of which, the complainant could not complete the course. The District Forum had ordered OP Nos. 1 & 2 to pay a sum of Rs.32,500/- along with Rs.25,000/- as compensation for physical and mental harassment as also cost of litigation to be paid jointly and severally by both the opposite parties. An appeal was carried against the order of the District Forum before the State Commission by the present petitioner. The State Commission noticed that under the memo of agreement between the opposite parties, the University was to make available 65% of the fee collected from the students of the Centre to UEC/Centre Coordinator to meet the requirement and non-recurring expenses of the Centre including the honorarium of the Centre Coordinator. In view of this position, the present petitioner was equally liable for deficiency in service suffered by the complainant. The State Commission dismissed the appeal. Accordingly, we do not find that any case has been made for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction as we do not find any illegality, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the orders of the fora below. The revision is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.


......................JR.K. BATTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................VINAY KUMARMEMBER