West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/157/2014

Arunabha Jana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sandip Banerjee - Opp.Party(s)

24 Aug 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

and  Kapot Chattopadhyay, Member.

   

Complaint Case No.157/2014

                                                       

Arunabha Jana……………….………Complainant

Versus

 Sandip Banerjee……….………………..Opp. Party.

 

 

 For the Complainant : Mr. Somasis Ponda, Advocate.

 For the O.P.                : 

 

Decided on: - 24/08/2015

                               

ORDER

                                       Bibekananda Pramanik, President - Case of the complainant, in brief, is that the opposite party Sandip Banerjee is a facilitator/provider of training of B.Ed course and he runs a study centre under the name and style Admission Point at Mishra Villa within the jurisdiction of this Forum and he offered admission for different types of special education including B.Ed course in private/regular/distance course through advertisement.  Seeing that advertisement, the complainant went to the office of the   opposite party and he made payment Rs.69,500/- to the opposite party as admission charge against grant of receipts on different date.  Thereafter, the opposite party registered the name of the complainant for B.Ed (Regular course) 2013-14 phase-III and issued provisional allotment letter (Final round up) and also allotted his name in Shree ram Mukh College of Education Vill. Dandawar ferozpur, Tehsil Riapur, Dist. Panchkula under Chaudhary Devilal University, Sirsa.  After such allotment, the complainant went to the aforesaid college for his final examination but no admit card was given to him from the said University due to non- payment of remaining examination fees by the opposite party and at

Contd……………….P/2

 

( 2 )

              that time, it was also found that a group of students had to face same situation like complainant.  Therefore, the complainant was compelled to come back without appearing in the final examination of B.Ed course for non-payment of examination fees by the opposite party.  Complainant met with the opposite party again and again with a request for arrangement for his final examination in B.Ed course but the opposite party neglected to do so.   Complainant also sent a lawyer’s notice to the opposite party through his advocate Mrinal Kanti Chowdhury.  In spite of that, the opposite party paid no heed to such request. Hence, the complaint praying for an order of refund of Rs.69,500/- and for Rs.50,000/- for mental  harassment and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- with interest. 

                                 Notice was duly sent to the opposite party by registered post with A/D, but the same was returned with endorsement long days absence.  Thereafter, paper publication of notice was made but in spite of that, the opposite party did not turn up.  Hence, the ex-parte hearing.

                                 To prove his case, the complainant has filed a written examination-in-chief, supported by affidavit and he was also accordingly examined as PW 1. During his examination, few documents were marked as X, X-1 & X-7 for identification respectively.  From the oral evidence of the opposite party as well as from the documents including payment receipts, remaining unchallenged, we find that during the period from 18/08/13 to 15/03/14, the complainant made payment of Rs.69,500/- to the opposite party for registration and admission for appearing in B.Ed examination.  It also appears from the unchallenged evidence of the complainant that the opposite party did not deposit the said amount with the concerned University for which the complainant could not appear in B.Ed examination.  It is also the evidence of the complainant that in spite of lawyer’s notice dated 26/08/14, the opposite party neither made arrangement for taking necessary action for appearance of the complainant in the final examination of the B.Ed, as offered by his advertisement nor he returned the said amount of Rs.69,500/- which was received by the opposite party.  In view of the said evidence of the  complainant  and the documents, filed by him, remaining unchallenged, it is held that the opposite party is  liable for deficiency in service  and the complainant is, therefore, entitled to the reliefs, as prayed for.

 

                                       Hence, it is,

                                                                   ORDERED,

                                                                            that the complaint case no.157/2014 is  allowed ex parte against the opposite party, Sandip Banerjee with cost.  Opposite party is directed to make refund of Rs.69,500/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of  filing of

Contd……………….P/3

 

( 3 )

 

             this complaint to the complainant and he is also further directed to pay Rs.50,000/- + 5,000/- towards mental harassment and litigation cost respectively to the complainant within a month from this date of order.  

 

             Dictated & Corrected by me

                                Sd/-                                             Sd/-                                                Sd/-

                            President                                      Member                                        President

                                                                                                                                   District Forum

                                                                                                                                 Paschim Medinipur