Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/259/2017

RAJ KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

swastik Computers - Opp.Party(s)

Gourav Sarangal

08 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,JAMMU

(Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                          .

 Case File  No                219/DFJ           

 Date of  Institution     01-12-2012

 Date of Decision           18-04-2018

 

Raj Kumar,

S/O Sh.Kaka Ram,

R/O H.No.146/2,Arjun Nagar,

Janipur,Jammu.

                                                                                                                                                           Complainant

               V/S

1.Swastik Computer Globe,

  R/O F32,Exchange Road,Jammu,

 Opp.Post Office through its

Prop.Shalika Khajuria.

2.Mr.Naveen

Swastik Computer Globe,

  R/O F32,Exchange Road,Jammu.

                                                                                                                                                            Opposite parties

 

CORAM

                  Khalil Choudhary            (Distt.& Sessions Judge)  President

                  Ms.Vijay Angral                                                              Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan                                       Member

 

In the matter of  Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer

                              Protection Act 1987.

 

Mr.Gourav Sarngal,Advocate for complainant, present.

Mr.Vishal Goel & Navpreet Singh,Advocate for Ops,present.

 

                                                                          ORDER

                                        Grievance of complainant as disclosed in the complaint is that being allured by the advertisement circulated by OP1 in the month of March,2009 he approached institution of OP1 where he met OP2 who is in charge of the institution,namely,Swastik Computer Globe situated at F32 Exchange Road, Jammu and after having discussion with OP2,complainant was apprised by Ops that their institution, namely, Swastik Computer Globe deals with various kinds of correspondence courses, which includes B.Sc.IT and many other courses and their institution is recognized by Vinayaka Missions University situated at Salem,Tamil Nadu and also told him that they are directly linked with the Vinayaka Missions University and they provide degree directly from the Vinayaka Missions University and on persistence inducement by OP2,complainant joined the course of B.Sc.IT Correspondence. According to complainant, he was told by Ops that the total fees for pursuing the degree as per norms and terms is Rs.35,000/-and he was asked to pay advance of Rs.5000/-and on,30-03-2009 he paid Rs.3000/-to OP2 and in the month of April, he paid Rs.7000/-to OP2,copy of receipt dated 30-03-2009 is annexed as Annexure-B.Complainant further submitted that in the month of June, he again deposited Rs.2000/-with OP2 as examination fee and in the month of June he appeared in the Ist year examination under registration No.105033080237,copy of payment receipt dated 05-06-2009 is annexed as Annexure-C.Allegation of complainant is that again in the month of September and October,2009 he deposited Rs.10,000/-with OP2 ,copy of receipt is annexed as Annexure-D and after two months when he enquired about his result, then OP2 apprised him that he had passed ist year examination, but the marks list will be given to him after passing final year and OP2 further told him that his collective  marks list of his three years course will be given to him alongwith degree after completing the course. That in February, 2010 OP2 demanded balance of Rs.13,000/-as course fee from him which was deposited by him with OP2,but no receipt was given by Ops despite requests made by the complainant. According to complainant in the year 2010 he appeared in the second year examination and after two months when he asked for his mark list from Ops he was informed that he has passed 2^nd year examination  and the marks list will be issued to him after passing 3^rd year and in the year 2011 he appeared in the final year and after few months he was informed by OP2 that he has passed his final year and his degree will be provided soon. Allegation of complainant is that after one month he repeatedly requested Ops to issue marks list and degree, but nothing was done by the Ops and finally in the year 2012 the Op2 demanded Rs.5000/-from him for issuance of his marks list and degree, but he refused to pay any money in excess of his course fees of Rs.35,000/-,but Op2 forced him to pay Rs.5000/-to him and Op2 provided him two year marks list which is a scanned copy of mark list and on the mark list word duplicate is mentioned. That the complainant after returning him opened the Website of Vinayaka Missions University entered his registration number to find his marks list, but no result was shown and complainant asked OP2 about his original marks list and his degree, but the Ops started avoiding the complainant and this act of Ops constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the present complaint. In the final analysis, complainant prays for compensation of Rs.4.20 lacs including litigation charges.

                 On the other hand,Ops filed written version and resisted the complaint on the ground that the complaint in hand is liable to be dismissed as the case in hand involves disputed questions of facts, which require detailed adjudication ,therefore, grievance of complainant if any, requires a detailed trial and can be addressed by a civil court of competent jurisdiction. That the complaint in hand is liable to be dismissed in terms of legal principle Suppresso Veri Suggestio Falsi.The complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. He has concealed material facts from this Forum. The Ops further submitted that complainant himself negligence he lost original mark sheets of 1^st and 2^nd year and the answering Ops at his request got duplicate mark sheets arranged for the complainant.However,complainant himself is a defaulter, he is yet to pay balance fee of Rs.14,000/-which he is not paying. Complainant further submitted that the annual fee for the course opted by the complainant was Rs.8,000/-per year plus Rs.1000/-per year as examination fee. In total annual fee was Rs.9,000/-and the total fee of the course was Rs.27,000/-.Further the Ops acknowledges the receipts of fee as true and correct, complainant paid an amount of Rs.13,000/-and is yet to pay the balance fee of Rs.14,000/-.It is denied that the Ops prolonged the issuance of mark sheets for the Ist year which the complainant had passed. As a matter of fact the original mark sheets for the Ist and 2^nd year were issued to the complainant well within time, as and when the mark sheets arrived from Tamilnadu,the same in original was handed over to the complainant like other students, however the  complainant lost the original mark sheets .It is denied that complainant ever paid any amount to the Ops in the month of February 2010 as is being alleged, as a matter of fact, the complainant did not pay any fee thereafter, he dilly delayed the payment of fee on one pretext or the other. It is further submitted that when the complainant in the year 2012 came to the institute, he was told to pay the balance fee of Rs.14000/-and take away his mark sheets and the Ops also requested to given him the duplicate mark sheets and assured that he would pay balance fee in a couple of days, when he would come to collect the mark sheet for the final year, but complainant never returned despite of numerous phone calls made by the Ops.Lastly it is prayed that complaint be dismissed.

                         Complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavit and affidavits of Ashish Pandita,Ashiq Hussain Bhat and Sourabh Jangotra,respectively.Complainant has placed on record copy of marks list, copy of certificate of eligibility, copy of receipt of Rs.3000/-dated 30-03-2009,copy of receipt of Rs.3000/-dated 22-10-2009,copy of receipt of Rs.2000/-dated 05-06-2009,copy of receipt of Rs.3000/-dated 10-09-2009 and copy of statement of marks,

           On the other hand,Ops adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavits of Naveen and Shalika Khajuria,respectively.

            We have perused case file and heard L/C for the parties at length.

           Briefly stated grievance of complainant he joined the course of B.Sc.IT Correspondence. According to complainant, he was told by Ops that the total fees for pursuing the degree as per norms and terms is Rs.35,000/-and he was asked to pay advance of Rs.5000/-and on,30-03-2009 he paid Rs.3000/-to OP2 and in the month of April, he paid Rs.7000/-to OP2.Complainant further submitted that in the month of June, he again deposited Rs.2000/-with OP2 as examination fee and in the month of June he appeared in the Ist year examination under registration No.105033080237.Allegation of complainant is that again in the month of September and October,2009 he deposited Rs.10,000/-with OP2 and after two months when he enquired about his result, then OP2 apprised him that he had passed ist year examination, but the marks list will be given to him after passing final year and OP2 further told him that his collective  marks list of his three years course will be given to him alongwith degree after completing the course. That in February, 2010,OP2 demanded balance of Rs.13,000/-as course fee from him which was deposited by him with OP2,but no receipt was given by Ops despite requests made by the complainant. According to complainant in the year 2010 he appeared in the second year examination and after two months when he asked for his mark list from Ops he was informed that he has passed 2^nd year examination and the marks list will be issued to him after passing 3^rd year and in the year 2011 he appeared in the final year and after few months he was informed by OP2 that he has passed his final year and his degree will be provided soon. Allegation of complainant is that after one month he repeatedly requested Ops to issue marks list and degree, but nothing was done by the Ops and finally in the year 2012 the Op2 demanded Rs.5000/-from him for issuance of his marks list and degree, but he refused to pay any money in excess of his course fees of Rs.35,000/-,but Op2 forced him to pay Rs.5000/-to him and Op2 provided him two year marks list which is a scanned copy of mark list and on the mark list word duplicate is mentioned. That the complainant after returning him opened the Website of Vinayaka Missions University entered his registration number to find his marks list, but no result was shown and complainant asked OP2 about his original marks list and his degree, but the Ops started avoiding the complainant and this act of Ops constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

            On the other hand,defence of Ops is that the annual fee for the course opted by the complainant was Rs.8,000/-per year plus Rs.1000/-per year as examination fee and the annual fee was Rs.9,000/-and total fee of the course was Rs.27,000/-.and the  Ops acknowledges the receipts of fee as true and correct, complainant paid an amount of Rs.13,000/-and is yet to pay the balance fee of Rs.14,000/-.It is denied that the Ops prolonged the issuance of mark sheets for the Ist year which the complainant had passed. As a matter of fact the original mark sheets for the Ist and 2^nd year were issued to the complainant well within time, as and when the mark sheets arrived from Tamilnadu,the same in original was handed over to the complainant like other students, however the  complainant lost the original mark sheets .It is denied that complainant ever paid any amount to the Ops in the month of February 2010 as is being alleged, as a matter of fact, the complainant did not pay any fee thereafter, he dilly delayed the payment of fee on one pretext or the other. It is further submitted that when the complainant in the year 2012 came to the institute, he was told to pay the balance fee of Rs.14000/-and take away his mark sheets and the Ops also requested to given him the duplicate mark sheets and assured that he would pay balance fee in a couple of days, when he would come to collect the mark sheet for the final year, but complainant never returned despite of numerous phone calls made by the Ops.

                          The evidence lead by the parties first needs to be gone through which on bare perusal of it reveals clear reiteration of those facts as the parties have put in their respective pleadings, therefore, evidence lead by the parties, both complainant and Ops did not require fresh recital so to avoid repetition in the case.

                       In order to substantiate his assertions, complainant relied upon copies of receipts issued by Ops from time to time in favour of complainant. At the same time, complainant also relied upon statement of marks, wherein it has been clearly mentioned that complainant had passed Semester first year & second year. There is no rebuttal to the documentary proof filed by complainant in support of his allegations. It is also to be noted that complainant supported his allegations by duly sworn his own affidavit and affidavits of Ashish Pandita,Ashiq Hussain Bhat and Sourabh Jangotra,respectively.

           On the other hand,OPs filed evidence affidavits of Naveen and Shalika Khajuria,respectively.The both the  witnesses of Ops in one voice deposed that the annual fee for the course opted by the complainant was Rs.8000/-+Rs.1000/-per year as examination fee. In total, the annual fee was Rs.9000/-and the total fee of the course was Rs.27,000/-.The deponents acknowledges the receipts issued against receipt of fee as true and correct, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.13000/-and is yet to pay the balance fee of Rs.14,000/-.

                     After going through the whole case with the evidence on record what reveals here is the case of complainant is genuinely filed with speaking reasons and merit as being consumer as per the purport of section 2(d) of Consumer Protection Act and Ops are the service providers having failed in their statutory duty to provide adequate and effective services. The purport of legislation is well defined and statutorily takes care of consumer rights and cannot legally afford to a situation like the one confronted herewith in a manner where they are deprived of their rights as of consumer. The consumers have to come forth and seek for redressal of their grievance. The case of the complainant is also genuinely filed for  seeking determination of his right by this Forum.

                          Accordingly, the best and befitting course which the Forum feels as adequate step to redress the grievance of complainant, Ops are directed to issue  mark sheet for 3^rd year in original, subject to payment of outstanding amount of Rs.14,000/-by the complainant. The OPs shall comply the order within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Copy of this order be provided to both the parties as per requirement of the Act. The complaint is accordingly disposed of and file be consigned to records after its due compilation.

Order per President                                            (Khalil Choudhary)                               

Announced                                                           (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

18-04-2018                                                                    President

                                                                              District Consumer Forum

                                                                                      Jammu.

Agreed by                                                           

                                                                                       

Ms.Vijay Angral          

  Member                                                                                              

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan

Member