IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SONITPUR AT TEZPUR
District: Sonitpur
Present: Smti A. Devee
President,
District Consumer D.R Forum,
Sonitpur, Tezpur
Smti S.Bora
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum,Sonitpur
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.09/2018
1.Sri Nripendra Nath Ghosh : Complainant
S/o Satish Chandra Ghosh
Resident of vill:Bhitorsuti
P.O :Kaliabhomora & P.S Tezpur
Distt:Sonitpur,Assam
Vs.
1.Sri Chaitanya Educational Institution : Opp.party
Campus : Shivam Towers, Boyapallem Junction
Kapuluppada Road, Old Paradesipalem
Vishakhapatnam-531163
Appearance:
Sri Pankaj Nath : For the Complainant
None appeared : For the Opp. Party
But the opp. party sent written argument
Date of argument : 13-08-18
Date of Judgment : 10-09-18
J U D G M E N T
- The complaint of the Complainant in a nutshell is that the complainant got his son, namely Shri Sourav Ghosh admitted into Class XI at Sri Chitanya Educational Institution situated at Shivam Towers, Boyapalem Junction, Kapuluppadda Road, Old Paradesipalem, Visakhapatnam-531163 in the year 2017.Initially, the complainant obtained Application Form at Rs.500/- then he paid an amount of Rs.5000/- for tuition fees.Thereafter, he deposited Rs.75,000/-.
In total the complainant paid Rs.80,000/- excluding the price of Application Form of Rs.500/-. The complainant’s aforenamed son was admitted in the institution vide Admission No.178304706, Roll No.53,IPL-7 and his son was allotted Room No.327 in a Non-AC room. But due to some reason, the complainant’s son could not pursue his studies and intended to withdraw his admission and same was intimated to the opposite party. To that effect a text message was sent on 28-06-2017 in mobile No.08486093328regarding his intention to cancel the admission. A letter through e-mail was also sent on 29-06-17. The complainant was informed that after mandatory deductions, the remaining fees would be refunded to the complainant at the earliest. When same was not done, the complainant went to the institution personally in the month of July when he was assured refund. After couple of weeks the opposite party sent an account payee cheque of Rs.41,211/- bearing No.105592 dated 08-09-2017 drawn on Axis Bank. The said cheque was later encashed on 11-10-2017. It has been contended by the complainant that as per terms and conditions of the institution, in the event of withdrawal of admission to Std.XI by any student or candidate before 30th June, the Institution would deduct Rs.20,000/- only for Non-AC residential admission and Rs.30,000/- only in case of Semi AC or AC residential admission.
Being aggrieved by the arbitrary deductions from the end of the Institution, the complainant intimated the institution about his grievance of non payment of remaining amount of Rs.18,789/- after deducting Rs.20,000/- from total deposit of Rs.80,000/-, but in vain. Hence the complainant lodged complaint against opposite party alleging deficiency of service on their part and prayed for refund of Rs.18,789/- along with Rs.50,000/- and Rs.5000/- as compensation and cost of litigation respectively.
- The opposite party appeared and contested the case by filing written statement with three documents. The documents are marked by the opposite party as Ext-B1, B2 and B3. The opposite party admitted the averments made in the complaint petition in bits and parts. However, the main contention of the opposite party was that the complainant availed IPL Super 60 IPL Semi AC for his son. Therefore the deduction would be Rs.30,000/- as per process and procedure of cancellation of Admission and Account settlement for IPL Super 60 Semi AC Batch. The opposite party claimed that in addition to Rs.30,000/- the opposite party is entitled to deduct the service tax on fees amounting to Rs.1,650/-, Pocket money expenditure of Rs.1,439/- and Akash Books Rs.5,700/-. Therefore, in total Rs.38,789/- is liable to be deducted and hence, the opposite party, after deduction of Rs.38,789/- from total fees deposited by the complainant i.e., Rs.80,000/-, issued a cheque of Rs.41,211/-. The opposite party also contended that only on 30-06-2017 the complainant submitted a letter of intention for cancellation of admission and after that they paid the said cheque of Rs.41,211/- on 08-09-2017.
3.The complainant examined himself as witness in the proceeding and marked as many as 9 documents as Exhibit-1 to 9. The opposite party along with the written version submitted affidavit of one Pindi Venkat Lakshmi Prasad sworn before the Notary, Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh). But the deponent failed to appear for cross-examination.
- We have heard learned advocate Sri P.Nath appearing for the complainant.In addition to oral submission Sri Nath also submitted written argument. We have gone through the written argument submitted for the parties and other materials on record.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
- Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief/reliefs as prayed for ?
DECISION ON THE POINTS WITH DISCUSSION
5.Point (a):- (i) Upon service of the notice of the complaint the opposite party, filed written statement and denied and contradicted on some vital averments of the complainant such as that- complainant actually availed IPL Super 60 Semi AC for his son which is evident from the copy of Application for admission into Hostel vide Application No.CB-178304706 submitted by the opposite party. As per terms and conditions of “Cancellation of Admission and Account Settlement before 30th June of the academic year Rupees Thirty thousand would be deducted for Semi AC or AC Residential admission
It is also seen that in all three documents which are marked as Ext-B1, B2, B3, the complainant subscribed his signature. Moreover, in the Application for Admission, we have noticed that there is a tick mark against IPL Super 60 Semi A/C in para No.5B. However, the complainant maintained his silence in this regard in his evidence on affidavit and has not denied the same.
(ii). As regards the norms for deductions, the complainant exhibited the money receipt issued by the opposite party and letters sent from both the sides and the Prospectus of the opposite party and its relevant pages
(iii) After going through the arguments put forward by both the parties hereto and all the documents available in the case record, it seemed that though the opposite party sent replies to the complainant prior to institution of the instant case, but nowhere mentioned that Rs.1,439/- and Rs.5,700/- were deductibles as pocket money expenditures and Akash Book respectively. Same were also not mentioned in the Prospectus as well. No doubt, the complainant put his signature in Ext- B2 and Ext-B3 as same has not been contradicted/denied by him. In those two documents, the total deduction amount was mentioned. But the appropriated details were found wanting. The opposite party did not care to provide the details of total deductions under the different heads in their replies
to clear the air regarding all the contentions over the deduction. This is not expected from a big educational institution like the opposite party. The opposite
party was all along aware that Ext-B2 and Ext-B3 were not available with the complainant. This is tantamount to negligence and indifferent approach on the part of opposite party towards the complainant. Therefore, we can safely say that there was deficiency in the service on the part of the opposite party for deducting excess amount without the knowledge of the complainant.
6.Point (b): The complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.18,789/- along with Rs.50,000/- and Rs.5000/- as compensation and cost of litigation respectively.
7. However, it is clear from our above discussion that the complainant is not entitled to get Rs.18,789/- in full since the deduction in case of Semi AC is Rs.30,000/-. But since the son of the complainant did not join in the institution for Academic Session, and in absence of any reasons assigned by the opposite party either in its written version or in the Prospectus, the complainant is entitled to get back the deducted amount of Rs.1,439/- as pocket money and Rs.5700/- for Akash Book. In addition to, in our considerate view, the complainant is entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand) only for their deficiency in service for not intimating the complainant all the details of the deductions in the event of cancellation of Admission either in the replies sent by the opposite party or in the prospectus of the institution for which the complainant had to take all the pain to lodge the instant complaint.Furthermore, the complainant is also entitled to cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.3,000/-.
O R D E R
In the result the complaint is allowed.The opposite party Sri Chaitanya Educational Institution is directed to pay to the complainant a total of Rs.20,139/- (Rupees Twenty thousand one hundred thirty nine)only within 30(thirty) days of receipt of the copy of judgment and order. In default, an interest @9% per annum shall be levied on the awarded sum effective from the date of complaint till full and final payment.
Given under our hands and seal of this Forum this 10th day of Sept, 2018.
Written by: Sri P. Das,Member We agree:- A.Devee
President
District Consumer D.R Forum,Sonitpur
Tezpur
Smt.S.Bora
Member
