BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

16^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016

O R D E R

SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA, MEMBER

This is a complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction against Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) to pay stipend of Rs.10,000/- for three months and job placement in Chivaro Technologies Pvt. Ltd., failing which in alternative to refund Rs.75,000/- to each of the complainants.

2.  The brief averments made in the complaint are as follows:

In the month of September 2014 one of the employee of the OP Company Mr. Shahzaad Iqbal introduced the complainant to Chivaro Technologies Pvt. Ltd., stating as one among reputed design firms in Bangalore.  They called the complainants stating there are vacancies in the Company, hence they attend the interviews.  Mr.Praveen Nair, General Manager of OP Company took the interview of the complainants and informed the complainants that they are selected for the job and complainants have to enroll through a training program which costs Rs.75,000/- for the period of six months, out of which three months for design coaching, two months for domain training and one month for projects.  As per Mr.Praveen Nair, after third month of training program, complainants were supposed to get a stipend of Rs.10,000/- per month for the respective three months, then complainants will be taken into the Company directly after six months of training.  Complainants when insisted all these in writing Mr.Praveen Nair said that one should believe in words more than documents and he cannot betray the complainant being the General Manager of OP Company.  Both complainants asked for some time to think about this program.  Mr.Praveen Nair promised them of best in class training, stipend of Rs.10,000/- and 100% placement in OP Company.  Even after that complainant used to get calls from Mr.Shahzaad Iqbal for joining the said program.  In the month of October complainants joined OP Company by paying the respective instalments starting from 08.08.2014 to 07.01.2015 a sum of Rs.75,000/- each.  On 21.10.2014 the said training program started.  After a week of the training program Mr.Praveen Nair disappeared from the Company.  After that Mr.Dattaram Mishra, MD of OP Company reduced the training period from six months to 4.5 months.  He said three months will be design training and after that 1.5 months will be domain class and projects. When complainants asked about Mr.Praveen Nair, Mr.Dattaram Mishra said Mr.Praveen Nair is not feeling well and he will be back within two weeks.  But he did not show up at all.  After two months of the training program teaching staff was on leave for the rest of the training period.  After that complainants were called in the Company, but there were no one to take classes.  Simply they wasted the time saying their teacher will be back soon.  Complainants came to know that the teachers had resigned from his post, because he was not paid salary from five months.  Complainants went to MD of the Company, but he did not meet them.  Every day complainants tried to meet him, but every time he had a reason that he is very busy and cannot talk to them, like that OP Company had wasted four months of valuable time and lot of money, which was spent on accommodation in Bangalore City. After four months complainant went to MD requesting for their stipend of Rs.10,000/- as they were not having money to continue their stay in Bangalore, but he refused and said there was no such thing promised by him.  When complainant explained about the promises made by Mr.Praveen Nair, he denied to accept the same and said he does not have any relation with Mr.Praveen Nair, he is now a former member and left the Company and asked the complainants if they have any written documents signed by Mr.Praveen Nair to prove it.  On 11.02.2015 OP kept a meeting with the complainants, clearly stated that he will not give any stipend and after four to five months he will refer the complainants to one of his customers and their selection will be dependent on their luck.  During the meeting he said that he does not know anything about what Mr.Praveen Nair said to the complainants.  When complainants asked to OP employee, Mr.Shahzaad Iqbal, in front of the OP, Mr.Shahzaad Iqbal accepted that Mr.Praveen Nair, former General Manager of OP Company had promised the complainants for stipend of Rs.10,000/- and 100% job  guarantee, but OP refused the same.  After the said meeting everything was recorded on on-call recording while talking to the employee of OP to show that OP accepts everything about meeting.  Thus OPs have lured the complainants. Hence, complainants felt deficiency in service against OP.  Under the circumstances, they are advised to file this complaint against OP for appropriate relief.

3. On behalf of OP one Mr.Shahzaad Iqbal, Business Development Officer of OP appeared and filed version contending that the skill development program stated by Chivaro Education and Learning Systems, a Chivaro Group Company for the benefit of Mechanical discipline Engineers where they learn the tools and technologies required for the industries to enhance their skills.  The objective was to make the engineers industry enabled and enhance the skills which help them to be eligible for a job with those skills.  The eligibility criteria for this program is first class
Engineer degree i.e. the cut off percentage was 60%.  Complainant No.1 Mr.Irshadulla is a second class degree and Mr.Omer MQ not completed the basic Engineering Degree at the time of joining.  Based on their request as an exceptional case the course co-ordinator gave them a chance to enroll for the program to enhance their skills.  The complainants have signed the enrollment form of Chivaro Education and Learning Systems and not Chivaro Technologies.  The training was completed in a proper way by the concerned faculty member.  The complainants did not attend the program properly and not performed test.  Only the test could judge what they have learnt.  There is no commitment by management for any stipend.  No such documents have been signed by the company or its representatives.  As per signed enrollment document, placement support will be provided for successfully completed candidates only on performance based either at Chivrao Technologies or at its Customer Companies.  The complainants have not attended the program regularly and not written the test and completed the program during the time frame as required.  OP denied that the Managing Director was not attending to the complainants.  There was a team which was looking after the day to day functioning of the program.  There are course co-ordinator and faculty members.  Managing Director had few meetings with them at the time of joining and afterwards when he was free complainants even tried to barge inside the cabin of the Managing Director.  When Managing Director was in an important meeting and they have behaved in a very unruly way with employees of the Company.  Complainants were not interested and put him only enough effort in learning the tools, technologies and enhancing their skills to be eligible for job.  They were only interested in a job by not learning the tools and completing the training program.  They were not eligible for any placement support.  There is no documentary proof that the Company and the management has promised them stipend or job.  Complainants are wasting time of the company and this Honorable Forum.  Among other grounds OP prays for dismissal of the complaint.

4.  Let us have a cursory glance at the documents produced by the OP. Document No.1 is copy of enrollment form skills development program issued by Chivaro Education and Learning System of complainant No.1.  Document No.2 & 3 are copies of PUC and SSLC marks cards. Document No.4 are statement of marks in BE, one to eight semester.  Document No.5 is copy of certificate of proficiency in Ultrasonic Testing, Magnetic Particle Testing, Liquid Penetrant Testing, Radiographic interpretation and Visual Testing. Document No.6 is copy of Driving Licence of the complainant No.1. Document No.7 is copy of the passport of the complainant No.1. Document No.8 is copy of the enrollment form of complainant No.2.  Document No.9 is PUC marks card of the complainant No.2.  Document No.10 is adhar card of complainant No.2.  Document No.11 is statement of marks of ICSE exam of Complainant No.2.  Document No.12 marks card of BE first to seventh semester of complainant No.2.  Document No.13 is attendance Register extract for the period November 2014 to February 2015 which does not bear name of the institution, sign or signature.  Document No.14. is copy of the 4 months training which does not bear the signature except the seal of the Chivaro Technologies Pvt. Ltd., that means training has been conducted by OP only not by Chivaro Education and Learning Systems.

5. So as to prove their case, complainant No.1 & 2 Mr.Md Irshadulla and Syed Omer.M.Q. have filed their joint affidavit evidence in support of the complaint reiterating the complaint averments and produced documents. Complainants have also filed written submission.

6. Though OP has filed the version has failed to file affidavit evidence in support of their defense version.  Hence, the version filed by the OP cannot be taken into consideration.

7.  Let us have a cursory glance at the documents produced by the complainant. Document No.1 & 2 are two numbers of CDs along with typed copies of the contents of audios.  Document No.3 to 8 are copies of the receipt issued by OP namely Chivaro Education and learning Systems Pvt. Ltd., dated 08.08.2014 for a sum of Rs.25,000/- issued in the name of complainant No.1, receipt dated 28.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, receipt dated 22.11.2014 for a sum of Rs.10,000/-, receipt dated 03.12.2014 for a sum of Rs.15,000/- in the name of complainant No.1, receipt dated 13.10.2014 for a sum of Rs.15,000/-, receipt dated 07.01.2015 for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, receipt dated 29.11.2014 for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, receipt dated 10.11.2014 for a sum of Rs.10,000/-, in the name of the complainant No.2. Document No.9 & 10 are copies of the ID cards of the complainant No.1 & 2 issued by Chivaro Education and learning Systems. 

8. On perusal of oral and documentary evidence of the complainant, it is made crystal clear that the complainant No.1 & 2 paid a sum of Rs.75,000/- each to OP Company for the period starting from 08.08.2014 to 07.01.2015 towards the course “post graduate Honors Diploma in Engineering design/Analysis.  OP has acknowledge the said sum by issuing the receipts to the complainant No.1 & 2 as per Document No.3 to 8.  One of the employee of the OP Company, namely Mr.Shahzaad Iqbal has introduced the complainants to OP Company stating that they are one of the reputed design firm in Bangalore and there are vacancies in the said company.  Hence they called the complainants to attend the interview. In the interview one Mr.Praveen Nair claims to be the General Manager of the OP Company took the interview of the complainants and promised that they are selected for the job and complainants have to enroll through a training program costing Rs.75,000/- each for a period of six months.  Further complainants are entitled to get a stipend of Rs.10,000/- per month for a period of three months. Then complainants will be back in the company directly after completion of six months of training.  When complainant insisted for any documents in support of their promise Mr.Praveen Nair informed that one should believe the words more than documents and he will not betray the complainants being the General Manager of OP Company and further promised 100% placement in OP Company. Based on their assurances and promises the complainants joined OP Company and paid Rs.75,000/- each by way of cash.  The documents produced bears the seal of the OP Company.  Hence, we can draw the inference that it is OP Company which is responsible for refunding the amount to the complainants.  OPs having received such a huge sum of Rs.1,50,000/- from the complainants have cheated the complainants.  This act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.  There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainants.  We are satisfied that complainants proved deficiency in service against OP.  Under the circumstances OPs are liable to refund the amount of Rs.75,000/- each to the complainants along with interest at 9% per annum from 07.01.2015 till realisation along with litigation cost of Rs.3,000/-.  Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:

                                  O R D E R

1. The complaint filed by the complainants is allowed in part. 

2. OP is directed to refund Rs.75,000/- each to the complainants 1 & 2 along with interest at 9% per annum from 07.01.2015 till realization.

3.  Further OP is directed to pay litigation cost of Rs.3,000/- to the complainants.

4. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

5. Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 16^th day of January 2016)

 MEMBER                           MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

NRS* 

C.C.No.473/2015

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant dated 13.08.2015

1. Sri.Md.Irshadulla & Syed Omer.M.Q.

Witnesses examined on behalf of the OP – Nil

MEMBER                           MEMBER                        PRESIDENT

NRS*