Smartacts Consultants Pvt. Ltd. SCO 437-438, Second floor, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh.

……Appellant(s)

V e r s u s

Shri Dharminder Singh S/o Parvinder Pal Singh R/o H. No. 460,
D-4, Panta Homes, VIP Road, Zirakpur, PB.              

 ....Respondent(s)

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

BEFORE:  HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER, PRESIDENT.

                MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER.

S.  JAGROOP  SINGH   MAHAL, MEMBER.

Argued by:          Sh. Sunil K. Mukhi, Adv. for the appellant.

PER  JAGROOP  SINGH   MAHAL, MEMBER

          This is OP’s appeal against the order dated 5.9.2011 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) whereby the complaint was allowed and the OP/appellant was directed to refund an amount of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant alongwith a sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation for physical harassment & mental agony, and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of litigation.  The order was to be complied with by the OP/appellant, within one month, from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which, it was liable to pay penal interest @ 12% p.a. on the awarded amount, from the date of filing of the present complaint, till its realization, besides costs of litigation.

2.                           Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that, the complainant/respondent availed the services of OP/appellant for arranging MBA study visa for Germany on payment of Rs.1,20,000/-. The complainant paid Rs.25000/- in advance and the remaining amount was to be paid on finalization of the visa. On 20.11.2010, the OP informed him that his documents were received by it on 08.11.2010 and after 14 days University would send reply to the documents. On 22.11.2010, OP intimated through e-mail (Annexure C-3), that they have applied for MBA in Germany and would intimate the university through e-mail. Later on, the complainant was informed by OP that his letter had been accepted by the University and he would get offer letter very soon and also informed him about the course fee for MBA.  It was alleged that on 26.02.2011, the OP sent the offer letter for MBI instead of MBA, which was not acceptable to the complainant, as MBI was not his field. He visited the office of the OP/appellant in this respect but to no avail. When his grievance was not redressed he ultimately vide Annexure
C-11 sought refund of the amount deposited by him with them, but nothing was done by the OP. Hence this complaint.

3.                           In its written reply the OP admitted that the complainant availed its services for assisting him for getting study visa for Post Graduate studies in Germany and accordingly OP got offer letter from foreign university.  It was pleaded that the complainant had paid only Rs.25000/-; that OP explained to the complainant about the education system in Germany, the degrees, recognition, and value of those degrees in India etc. and intimated name of the universities where the OP had applied for within 14 days from the receipt of the requisite documents. However, the complainant preferred to join the course in India and thus, the complainant had no right to seek refund of the amount. It was alleged that in fact, the complainant got a good job with travel agency in Chandigarh, therefore, he was not interested in perusing the MBA course. Rests of the allegations of the complaint were denied.  Pleading no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.

4.                           Parties led evidence in support of their case. 

5.                           After hearing the ld. Counsel for the parties and on going through the evidence on record, the ld. District Forum allowed the complaint, as stated in the opening para of this order

6.                           Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/OP.

7.                           We have heard arguments of the learned Counsel for the appellant/OP on the point as to whether the appeal should be admitted for regular hearing. We have considered pleadings and the evidence produced by the parties on record before the learned District Forum.

8.                           The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the complainant/respondent wanted to go to Germany for study Visa that the same was procured for him but he refused to pay remaining amount or to take admission in the university arranged by them.  It is argued that since the complainant himself is not willing to avail the admission in the institute, he is neither entitled to the refund of the amount paid by him nor to any compensation and costs. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the District Forum is liable to be set aside.  

9.                           The appellant/OP vide Annexure C-10 procured admission for the complainant in Master Program International Business Informatics in summer semester 2011. The question is whether the complainant wanted admission in this program or not.  When the complainant was made aware of this letter he wrote an E-mail Annexure C-9 on 28.2.2011, telling the OP that MBI was not his field related degree, he therefore, was not willing to get admission in the said course and secondly that the OP/appellant had promised to get him admission in MBA in March Session but did not fulfill their promise and therefore, the amount be refunded to him. Annexure C-3 is clear in this respect  that the complainant wanted admission in only the following courses:-

          i.        International Business and Intercultural Management          (M.A.)

          ii.       International Business and Management (M.A.)

iii.              International Business Consulting (MBA)

iv.               International Hospitality and Management.

The OP wrote Email Annexure C-4 on 18.12.2010 mentioning therein as follows:-

          As per our conversation I promised you to give the names of the respective universities on Saturday. Herewith are the names:

          International Business and Intercultural Management (M.A.) Heilbronn University

          International Business and Management-MA-Berlin University.

          International Business Consulting (MBA)-Furtwangen University.

          International Hospitality and Management-Heilbronn University.

          International Business (MBA)-Wurzburg University of Applied Sciences.

          I would like to inform you that Christmas holidays have started in Germany and the University will open in the first week of January, 2011. Therefore, we may get the admission letter by the mid of the month.

          It is clear that the OP/appellant was engaged by the complainant for getting admission in the above mentioned course only. The Master Program of International Business Informatics does not find mention in Annexure C-3 or C-4 from which, it is very clear that the complainant never asked the OP/appellant to get admission in the said Course. Moreover, MBI is not his field related degree and therefore, the question of the complainant joining the said program does not arise. One thing is clear that the OP has not got admission to the complainant in any of the programmes for which the complainant consented, which are mentioned in Annexure C-3 and C-4. The OP therefore, did not fulfill their promise and did not render the service promised by them for which the amount of Rs.25,000/- had been taken.  The stand of the complainant not to get admission in MBI is justified and he is entitled to the refund of the amount paid by him to the OPs.

10.             The OPs did not refund the amount when asked for. As per the complainant he made a number of rounds to their office and his father also visited the office of the OP as mentioned in Annexure C-9. Annexure C-11 and C-12 also show that the OP harassed the complainant instead of returning the amount to him.

11.             The OP has wasted the valuable year of study of the complainant, they kept him in dark and did not get him admission in the course agreed to between the parties. It is due to this reason that in addition to refund of the amount of Rs.25,000/- the OP was also directed by the learned District Forum to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- as compensation for physical harassment and mental agony. In view of loss of career and the mental and physical harassment suffered by the complainant the amount of Rs.15,000/- cannot be said to be excessive.

12.                       In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that there is no substance in the contention of the appellant and the impugned order is perfectly legal and valid.  There is no merit in this appeal and the same should not be admitted for regular hearing, as it would cause further harassment to the complainant/respondent who will have to engage a counsel for pursuing his case in appeal apart from wastage of his valuable time. The appeal is accordingly dismissed in limine.

                    Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.

Pronounced.