DATE OF FILING - 06.05.2013

                                                                                                DATE OF DISPOSAL - 24.3.2014

                                                                                     O R D E R

Dr. N.Tuna Sahu, Member

            The above named complainant filed this consumer dispute under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short C.P. Act 1986) against Opposite Parties (for short O.Ps) alleging deficiency in service.

2.         The brief fact of the complainant’s case is that he is a graduate and as per the advertisement floated by the O.Ps for admission into B.Ed. Course, he approached the O.P. No.1 at his Office at Hillpatna, Berhampur, Ganjam. The O.Ps narrated the bright future of the course and accordingly on 8.9.2012 the complainant submitted the documents like 10^th Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +2 Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +3 Provisional Certificate and Mark Sheet and Migration Certificate for taking admission into B.Ed. Course. Thereafter the complainant was advised to deposit Rs.75,000/- towards Course fees and paid the same vide Receipts No.102 dated 01.01.2011 for Rs.30,000/-, Receipt No.144 dated 27.02.2012 for  Rs.15,000/-, Receipt No.174 dated 12.06.2012 for Rs.10,000/- and Receipt No.184 dated 12.06.2012 for Rs.20,000/- respectively. The O.Ps collected the above original documents of the complainant for necessary verification but the O.Ps neither conducted classes nor supplied with any materials as per promise. The O.Ps also did not conduct examination and not returned the original documents as collected in spite of several approaches. The complainant along with other 25 students met the O.Ps at the Office at Hillpatna who promised to give the identity cards for the examination and to conduct the examination during October 2012 through online registration but it was never done. The complainant suffered from harassment and mental agony for the deliberate and intentional deficiency in service on part of the O.Ps. Hence, the complainant prayed before this Forum to direct to return the original documents so received by the O.P. No.1 and to refund Rs.75,000/- with interest and to pay Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.3,000/- towards cost of litigation  and to pass such other orders as deem fit in the interest of justice.  

1. Notice was issued against both Opposite Parties but the same was returned unserved with remark ‘insufficient address’ hence the complainant served the notice through paper publication. The notice was published in the local Odia daily ‘The Lokakatha’ on 14^th August 2013. But in spite of sufficient notice through local daily newspaper, the O.Ps did not prefer to appear and contest the case. The O.Ps did not prefer to contest the case in spite of paper publication, hence declared set as exparte on 09.01.2013. The case was proceeded exparte on the date of final hearing.

1. On the date of final hearing of the consumer dispute, we heard the case exparte since the O.Ps did not prefer to contest their case. We hear the argument from the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the complaint and written argument filed by him. We have also verified the money receipts filed by the complainant placed in the case record. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the complainant was eager to complete his B.Ed Course for appointment in any educational institution of the state Government like Sikhya Sahayak or Gana Sikhyak etc. So, as per the advertisement of the O.Ps for B. Ed course, he took admission on payment of Rs.75,000/- on different dates vide Money Receipts No.102 dated 01.01.2011 for Rs.30,000/-, Receipt No.144 dated 27.02.2012 for  Rs.15,000/-, Receipt No.174 dated 12.06.2012 for Rs.10,000/- and Receipt No.184 dated 12.06.2012 for Rs.20,000/- respectively.  Accordingly on 08.09.2012, the complainant also submitted the documents like 10^th Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +2 Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +3 Provisional Certificate and Mark Sheet and Migration Certificate before O.Ps for taking admission into B.Ed. Course. But after receipt of documents and course fee of Rs.75,000/-, the O.Ps neither conducted classes nor supplied with any course materials and did not conduct examination in spite of several approaches. The complainant along with other candidates approached the O.P.No.1 at his Office at Hillpatna who promised to issue identity cards, registration slips and admit cards for the examination but was never done. This is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on part of the O.Ps and the complainant has been harassed financially and mentally tortured, so prayed to refund the deposited amount of Rs.75,000/- towards course fees along with compensation and cost of the litigation.  In support of his arguments he has also placed a citation of the Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2013(3) CPR 48 (NC).

1. We heard the above arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant and have also verified the money receipts in original. It is beyond doubt that the complainant is a consumer of the O.Ps as he has paid Rs.75,000/- towards the course fees for B. Ed examination as evident from the money receipts placed in the case record as Annexur-2. The complainant is a young student and he has a bright future who was aspired to make a career in teaching.  However, the O.Ps though received the amount but neither conducted any class nor hold examination for the said course. This is a bright example of unfair trade practice and exploitation of poor consumer. The most important and upsetting thing is that in spite of several notices including through newspaper publication, they did not prefer to contest their case. This shows their indifferent attitudes towards a bonafide consumer who has been physically harassed and financially exploited by the unscrupulous trade practice of O.Ps. It is also a fact that the O.Ps received an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards B. Ed course but did not conduct any examination and even not contested the case against them. In absence of version or argument in support of the case of the O.Ps, we accept the uncontroverted argument of the learned counsel for the complainant; hence we feel that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on part of the O.Ps. For that the O.Ps are bound to make good of the said deficiency in service and to pay compensation to the complainant for harassment and financial loss.

6.         As for as compensation is concerned, we convinced that legal injury is caused to the complainant due to negligence on part of O.Ps and in order to recognize legally protected rights of complainant, he needs to be compensated. We also know that the O.Ps committed gross deficiency in service and indulged in unfair trade practice by not conducting B.Ed. examination though received the course fees. The most disappointing and illegal thing is that the O.Ps received the Original Certificates of the complainant like 10^th Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +2 Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +3 Provisional Certificate and Mark Sheet and Migration Certificate but did not care to return even after several approaches.  Hence, there is reckless negligence on part of the O.Ps for non-returning of valuable documents like original board certificates.   In this regard we would like to cite the authority of Lordship of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Consumer Unity and Trust Society, Jaipur Vs. The Chairman & Managing Director, Bank of Borada, Calcutta & Anr reported in 1986-99,Consumer 1456(NS) observed as follows:

            “Negligence is absence of reasonable or prudent care which a reasonable person is expected to observe in a given set of circumstance. But the negligence for which a consumer can claim to be compensated under this sub-section must cause some loss or injury to him. Loss is a generic term; it signifies some detriment, deprivation or damage. Injury too means any damage or wrong. It means invasion of any legally protected interest of another. Thus the provision of Section 14(1) (d) are attracted if the person from whom damages are claimed is found to have acted negligently and such negligence must result in some loss to the person claiming damages, injury, if any, must flow from negligence.

            In the present case, a legal injury is cause to the complainant due to negligence on part of O.Ps and, therefore, in order to recognize the legally protected rights of the complainant, he needs to be compensated. The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards B.Ed. Course fees and submitted his original certificates starting from 10^th Board Certificate and Mark Sheet up to +3 Provisional Certificate and Mark Sheet and Migration Certificate. The O.Ps did neither conduct the B.Ed. examination nor return his valuable certificates. In this way the O.Ps caused damage to the career of the complainant by deceitfully grabbing a huge amount for the said purpose.  We feel that the complainant suffered loss financially and harassed mentally. For this, the O.Ps are bound to compensate the complainant for the loss or injury caused.

As far as compensation is concerned, in this case, the complainant has claimed an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for the loss suffered and Rs.3,000/- towards cost of the litigation besides he has also prayed for refund of his deposited amount of Rs.75,000/- for B.Ed. Course. Hence, in our considered view, we feel that Rs.20,000/- is just and proper toward compensation in the fact and circumstance of the present case since the complainant has suffered two years loss of his bright career, so we allow the said amount towards compensation to be paid by the O.Ps.  As far as the cost of litigation is concerned, we allow a moderate amount of Rs.2,000/- to meet the legal expenses of the complainant since he was forced to file this consumer complainant and to hire the services of an advocate for the said purpose.    

            In the light of above discussion, we allow the case of the complainant against both Opposite Parties since both are jointly and severally liable to  refund the deposited amount of Rs.75,000/- to the complainant along with Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation.

7.         In the result, we direct both Opposite Parties who are jointly and severally liable to refund the B.Ed. Course fees of Rs.75,000/- to the complainant along with Rs.20,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation. We also direct the O.Ps to return the original certificates of the complainant like 10^th Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +2 Board Certificate and Mark Sheet, +3 Provisional Certificate and Mark Sheet and Migration Certificate. The aforesaid amount along with certificates shall be paid to the complainant within two months of receipt of this order failing which the entire amount shall be recovered from both O.Ps along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of order till actual realization of the same under Section 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The consumer dispute is disposed of accordingly.

7.         The order is dictated and corrected by me on this 24^th day of March 2014. Copy of the order shall be supplied to parties free of cost as per rule.

                                                                                    (Dr. N. Tuna Sahu)                        

                                                                                                 Member       

                                                                        I Agree           (Mrs. Minati Pradhan)

                                                                                                Lady Member