DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PALAKKAD
Dated this the 16th day of August 2022
Present : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President
: Smt.Vidya A., Member
: Sri. Krishnankutty N.K.,Member
Date of filing: 11.02.2020.
CC/23/2020
Karimullah A,
16/287, Nandanam House, - Complainant
Thekkeparambu,
Puduppariyaram P.C,
Palakkad- 678 731
(Party in Person).
Vs
1. Shaji Navas E,
S/O.Muhammed,
Elambilathottathil,
A-16, Anaswara,
Ganesh Nagar,
Sekharipuram Road,
Palakkad – 678 001.
2. Dr.Indu G,
D/o.Gopalakrishnan P.N,
6/121, Surya, AEM Nagar,
Chittur, Palakkad-678 101.
3. Rejin C.R, Opposite Parties
S/o.Ramanan C.R,
13/494, Chulliparabil House,
Vadakkumuri,
Trichur -680 570.
4. Ranjith T.K,
S/o.Radhakrishnan T.K,
4/56, Thenkinkattil House,
Thottakkara Post,
Ottappalam – 679 102
(By Adv:Rohith K.S., & Stalin E.R)
O R D E R
By Smt Vidya A., Member
Pleadings of the complainant in brief.
1. Complainant’s daughter joined “Nucleus Centre”at Palakkad for NEET Coaching on 29th June 2019. According to their schedule the coaching fees for 1 year including GST of 18% was 18,000/- which is to be paid within a month and classes were to be held on Sundays.
Accordingly the complaint paid an advance amount of Rs.10,000/- (8474 course fee +1526 GST). Later they came to know about Unique Integrated Full Time Plus one course (UFIP+1) and they contacted 1st opposite party, the Director of that institution for further details for joining the course and was informed that the Total fee for that course for year is 1,12,000/- (course fee Rs.95,000 + GST of 18% Rs.17,100/-)
They asked the complainant to pay Rs.1,02,100/- after deducting the advance amt of Rs.10,000/- for joining that course. They told that NEET coaching will be given through UFIP+1 class and language classes will also be taken along with that and promised to take extra classes for covering the portions which she had not attended.
The complainant paid Rs.1,02,100/- through cheque on 6th July 2019 and Rs.8,210/- was collected for school registration, uniform and maths text book as cash. Then the complainant’s daughter was admitted in their hostel and Rs.13,000/- paid by cash (caution Deposit Rs.6,500/- Fee RS.6,500/-) for which they did not give any receipt. From 10th July, she started to attend regular classes, but they did not take any extra classes as promised till she left that institution. The complaint’s daughter had to face some problems in the hostel and this affected her studies and she was forced to leave that Institution. Even though they contacted 1st opposite party, The director, there was no response from him. On 3rd September the complainant was called for a parents meeting., But other parents were not present and the complainant had a discussion with principal, warden and 4th opposite party and requested them to take strict action., But they did not do anything and the complainant’s daughter discontinued her studies due to pressure of previous portions which she had not attended and because of the mental harassment of the hostel mates.
The complainant approached them for the refund of the amount paid by him. The principal agreed to refund the amount after discussion, but there was no response from them after that. The 1st opposite party informed him that the complainant’s daughter can continue the same academic session on the next year which the complainant did not agree.
Finally they agreed to pay 50% of the total amount of Rs.1,12,100/- after deducting GST-Rs.17,000/- and book, materials cost of Rs.6,000/- which amounts to Rs.44,500/- As per their attendance register the complainant’s daughter attended the class on 1st and 15th October and therefore they calculated the amount 15th October 2019. But it was not acceptable to the complainant as the complainant’s daughter left the institution on 30th September 2019.
Finally after discussions and phone calls they agreed to pay 60% of the amount that is Rs.53,400/-. But they were not ready to refund the GST. The complaint received a registered post on 17th January, 2020 from Nucleus Center containing a settlement letter along with cheque for an amount of Rs.53,400/- dated 25.04.2020.
But the opposite parties were not willing to refund the GST. The loss of education of complainant’s daughter during the Academic year 2019-2020 affected the whole family and his daughter in particular.
So this complaint is filed for directing the opposite parties to pay 75% of the course fee and 18% GST that the complainant paid and Rs.2 lakh as compensation for the loss of the academic year and the mental agony and inconvenience followed by that.
2. Complaint was admitted and notices were issued to the opposite parties. They entered appearance through counsel and filed vakkalath. But they failed to file their version even after several postings. So they were set ex-parte. The op’s filed IA.107/21 to set aside the ex-parte order and it was dismissed.
Later they filed RA 1/22 to review the order setting them ex-parte and it was allowed. The opposite parties filed their version.
3. The main contentions raised by the opposite parties in their version.
The opposite parties admit that the complainant’s daughter joined the Nucleus Centre at Palakkad for NEET coaching on 29.06.2019. She had joined the Unique Integrated Full Time Plus One Course (UFIP=1) and paid the course fee for one year along with GST amounting to Rs.1,12,000/-. (Rs. 95,000/- towards course fee + Rs. 17,000/-towards GST).
It is also admitted that the classes started during May 2019, and due to late admission of complainant’s daughter they assured extra classes to cover up the portions. The complainant’s daughter was admitted in their hostel on payment of Rs.6500/- towards rent for the first month. They also admit that Rs.8210/- was collected from the complainant ie Rs.4000/- for SCOLE Kerala Registration Rs.4000/- for 2 pairs of Uniform and Rs.210/- for Maths Text Book.
Since the complainant’s daughter was late admission, the teachers asked her to approach them for covering the earlier portion. But she never approached them. There was no issues in the hostel as alleged by the complainant and from the beginning his daughter was uncomfortable in staying away from parents and this kept her distracted from studies. They provide most suitable atmosphere for the students to concentrate on their studies. On 29.07.2019, the complainant approached the 1st opposite party in connection with the discontinuation of the course by his daughter, and the opposite parties suggested another hostel as an alternative arrangement. But she did not want to stay away from parents and decided to discontinue the course.
On 16.12.2019, the complainant called the opposite party and enquired about the refund of the fees. Opposite party 1 informed that she is eligible for refund of Rs.53,400/- and the complainant agreed the same. The amount of refund was arrived at by the opposite party by deducting Rs.500/- towards admission fees, Rs.35,100/- towards tuition fee for 3 months, Rs.17,100/- towards GST and Rs.6000/- towards the study materials provided to the complainant’s daughter (Total Rs 58,700/-) As agreed, the 1st opposite party send a settlement letter on 17.09.2019 along with cheque dated 25.04.2020 for an amount of Rs.53,400/-. The amount of refund was paid to the complainant as per their refund policy. The complainant is not entitled to get any amount claimed towards refund or compensation and the complaint has to be dismissed with cost of the opposite parties.
4. From the pleadings, the following points arises for consideration.
1. Whether an order can be passed with the persons arrayed in
the complaint?
2. Whether the GST collected by the opposite parties institution is
refundable?
3. Whether there is any Deficiency in service on the part of the
opposite parties?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
5. Reliefs, as to cost and compensation.
5. Complainant filed proof affidavit in evidence and Ext. A1 to A9 marked. Opposite parties did not file their proof affidavit and evidence closed. Complainant filed notes of arguments. Heard the complainant.
6. Point No.1
The complainant’s claim is for refund of the amount paid in the NEET coaching centre named NUCLEUS CENTRE , Palakkad together with compensation for the loss of study for one year. The opposite parties in RA 1/22 (filed by them for reviewing the order setting them ex-parte) had stated that opposite party no.1 is the Managing partner of Nucleus, the Centre of Science Palakkad and he is filing the petition on behalf of other opposite parties also. The version also is filed on behalf of all the opposite parties. There is nothing in the pleadings of opposite parties denying the liability of opposite parties , based on their legal status vis-à-vis M/s. Nuclues the Centre of Science, Palakkad.
So this order can be very well be passed against the 1st opposite party as Managing partner of the Institution and other opposite parties as his partners in the Firm.
Point no.1 is decided accordingly.
Point No.2
7. The opposite parties in their version admit that the complainant had remitted Rs.1,12,100/- as course fee for his daughter in their institution. It is also admitted that after few months she discontinued her studies and the complainant approached them for the refund of the amount paid by him. As per the agreement between them, the opposite parties refunded an amount of Rs.53,400/- by cheque dated 25.04.2020. Their contention is that they refunded this amount as per their refund policy and provided the statement of how they arrived at this amount. As per that they deducted Rs.500/- towards admission fee, Rs.35,100/- towards tuition fee for 3 months, Rs. 17,100/- towards GST and Rs.6000/- towards the study material provided to the complainant’s daughter. (Total Rs.58,700/-)
8. According to the complainant his daughter joined the NEET coaching on 29th June 2019 and discontinued her studies on 30th September and vacated the hostel on the same day. But as per the opposite parties attendance register, she was present on 1st and 15th October, So they collected fees for the month of October also.
9. It is seen from the calculation given by the opposite parties that they had collected the tuition fees for 3 months amounting to Rs.35,100/-. The complainant has produced invoices showing the payment of fees which is marked as Ext A1 & A2. Ext A1 shows the payment of advance amount of Rs.10,000/- and A2 shows the payment of balance of course fee amounting to Rs.1,02,100/-. Only GST collected is shown separately and the tuition fee and cost of study materials is not shown separately. From these, the opposite parties’ contention seems to be correct and they had charged tuition fee only for the months which the complainant’s daughter attended the class.
10. Now the question is whether the GST collected is refundable?
From both parties’ contentions, it is clear that opposite parties had refunded the amount of Rs.53,400/- which was received by the complainant. The opposite parties have collected 18% GST also. They are liable to refund the proportionate GST for that amount.
Since the refund of tuition fees is by the issuance of a credit note and it will allow the opposite party to decrease/claim refund of his GST liability in his returns without requiring him to undertake any tedious process, the opposite party is also liable to refund the proportionate GST on the amount refunded. Hence the opposite parties are liable to refund 18% of RS.53,400/- amounting to Rs.9612/- with interest at 9% from the date of payment. Point No.2 is answered accordingly.
Points 3,4,5,6
11. Complainant’s main prayer is regarding the payment of GST collected and compensation for the loss of one academic year of his daughter. Point No.2 answers the question regarding the refund of GST. There is Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not refunding the GST together with the amount refunded. The complainant also claims refund of 75% of the course fee. The opposite parties have refunded the amount as per their refund policy which seems to be appropriate in this context.
12. Regarding the claim of compensation for the loss of academic year of complainant’s daughter, the complainant has not adduced any evidence to show that the opposite parties did not do anything to resolve the issues in the hostel and the teachers of opposite parties institution were not willing to help her to cover up the earlier portions which lead her to pressure in continuing with the studies. There was no attempt on the part of the complainant to cross examine the opposite parties to bring out the veracity of their contentions. Further, the opposite parties have denied the entire contentions and stated that from the beginning the complainant’s daughter was not ready to stay away from parents and this affected her studies. So the burden is on the complainant to prove that the difficulties faced by her daughter was the result of deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Since he failed to prove this, we find it difficult to cast liability on the opposite parties for the deficiency in service on this aspect.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.
The opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to compensate the complainant.
We direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to refund 18% GST of Rs.53,400/- amounting to Rs.9612/- with interest at the rate of 9% from 25.04.2020 till realization.
We further direct the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- for the Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not refunding the GST and for the mental agony suffered by the complainant in dragging him into a unnecessary litigation and Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of this litigation.
The above amounts are be paid within 45 days of receipt of this order, failing which the opposite party is liable to give Rs.250/- as solatium per month or part thereof till the date of payment.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 16th day of August 2022.
Sd/-
Vinay Menon V
President.
Sd/-
Vidya A Member
Sd/-
Krishnankutty N.K
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext. A1– Invoice no.433 dated 29.006.2019 issued by Ops.(Original)
Ext.A2 - Invoice no.492 dated 17.07.2019 issued by Ops (Original)
Ext.A3 - Copy of letter send by complainant to GST 2nd circle office,
Palakkad dated 21.01.2020.
Ext.A4 - Settlement letter dated 16.01.2020 from Nucleus, The centre of Science,
Palakkad.
Ext.A5 - Copy of cheque dated 25.04.2020.
Ext.A6-Copy of Notice under section 122 (1) of the CGST &SGST ACT 2017 from
the Office State Tax officer, Palakkad to the Nucleus centre.
Ext.A7-Copy of request letter for transfer certificate by Complainant’s daughter.
Ext.A8-Copy of Cancellation Memo-issued by Scole Kerala.
Ext.A9-Copy of TC-issued by Scole Kerala.
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties:NIL
Cost: 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only)
