Ex-P A R T E O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.M. RATNAKAR – HON’BLE PRESIDENT
1) By this complaint the Complainant has prayed that the Opposite Party be directed to refund Rs.28,000/- and interest @ 12% p.a. thereon from 01/08/2011 till its realization. It is also prayed that the Opposite Party be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment to the Complainant including the cost of this complaint.
2) According to the Complainant, the Opposite Party is a Primary School which is run by its Director/Partner Ms. Sonal Shah and Ms. Monica Vora at the address given in the cause title of the complaint. The Opposite Party is engaged in the activity of imparting educational services such as, coaching to the student/students known as play group, nursery, lower K.G., Sr. K.G., etc. against the payment of charges/fees. It is submitted that the son of the Complainant Ranveer then age of 3 years was admitted to class lower K.G. in the Opposite Party’s school on 11/07/2011. The Complainant at the time of admission had paid total amount of Rs.30,000/- towards the advance fees for six months from June, 2011 to November, 2011 which includes Rs.28,000/- towards fees, Rs.500/- towards application form, Rs.500/- towards registration and Rs.1,000/- towards stationery charges. The receipt of it was issued by Monica Vora on 11/07/2011 bearing No.874. The copy of which is marked as Exh.‘A’. It is alleged that Ranveer attended the school for six days between 12/07/2011 to 19/07/2011, however, thereafter, he did not attend the Opposite Party’s school for the reasons stated in para 5 of the complaint which were embracing to Ranveer. Ranveer thereafter did not go to the Opposite Party’s school from 20/07/2011 onwards. The Complainant did not force him because of the below expectation performance by the school. It is alleged that the Opposite Party did not provide the stationary although it charged Rs.1,000/- for the same.
3) It is the case of the Complainant that as the Complainant had paid fees for six months and Ranveer attended the school only for six days. The Complainant therefore, wrote letter to the school on 26/07/2011 addressed to Ms. Sonal and Ms. Monica and informed them that Ranveer has not attended the school after 20/07/2011 and he will not attend the Opposite Party’s school anymore. The Complainant by the said letter requested to deduct some appropriate fees from Rs.30,000/- and refund the balance. The said letter was sent by Speed Post but it was returned undelivered on 06/08/2011 with the endorsement “Not Claimed Returned to Sender”. The copy of the envelop and postal receipt are marked as Exh.‘C’. The said letter was also sent through Vichare Courier to the Opposite Party. The same was acknowledged on 09/08/2011 as per the document at Exh.‘D’. The Complainant thereafter, send reminder to the Opposite Party on 23/09/2011 through Vichare Courier. It was acknowledged by the Opposite Party on 26/09/2011 as per Exh.’E’ & ‘F’. According to the Complainant, the Opposite Party’s school did not keep its promise that they will communicate with Ranveer in such a manner that he understand the teacher’s instruction in English. It is submitted that even assuming that Ranveer voluntary withdrew from the school, considering the fact that Ranveer did not utilize any of the services of the school after the first six days the Opposite Party has no right to retain/forfeit the fees for the entire six months. The Opposite Party has thus, indulged in unfair trade practice to charge the fees in advance and then deny to refund the same. The Complainant has therefore, prayed that an amount of Rs.2,000/- be reduced from the total amount paid by the Complainant of Rs.30,000/- and the reliefs as claimed in para 1 of this order may be granted.
4) The Opposite Party remained absent though served with notice. The compliant therefore, proceeded ex-parte against the Opposite Party. The Complainant has filed affidavit of evidence and submitted oral argument in support of the claim made in the complaint. He relied the observations in the following cases –
1) Revision Petition No.3365/2006 & Ors. between FIIT JEE Ltd. V/s. Dr. (Mrs.) Minathi Rath & Ors., decided by the Hon’ble National Commission, 14/11/2011.
2) Appeal No.A-509/2006 between Bullenion Tutorial V/s. Rahul Das, decided by the Hon’ble State Commission, Delhi on 09/01/2007.
3) Appeal No.A-830/2006 between FIIT JEE Ltd. V/s. Dr. Minathi Rath, decided by State Commission, Delhi on 04/06/2010 reported in 2007 CTJ 183.
4) First Appeal No.2620/1998 between James Longuin D’Souza V/s. Principal, Rural Medical College, decided on 27/11/2006 by the Hon’ble Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai
and reported in 2007 CTJ 297.
5) Revision Petition No.813/2009 between Sehegal School of Competition V/s. Dalbir Singh by the Hon’ble National Commission, reported in 3 (2009) CPJ 33.
The Complainant relying on the observations in the aforesaid cases made submission that the reliefs claimed in this complaint are just and proper. He submitted that the claim made in the complaint therefore, be granted against the Opposite Party.
5) Upon going through the documents produced on record and considering the affidavit of the Complainant which goes unchallenged we hold that the claim made by the Complainant to refund Rs.28,000/- by the Opposite Party from the fees/charges collected by the Opposite Party from the Complainant can be said just and proper. The Complainant has claimed interest on the said amount @ 12% from 01/08/2011, in our view the said interest claimed by the Complainant is exorbitant and the Opposite Party is liable to pay interest @ 6% p.a. from 01/08/2011 till it’s realization. The Complainant has prayed compensation of Rs.10,000/- including the cost of this complaint for mental agony and physical harassment, we find that the said amount claimed by the Complainant is also exorbitant amount and it would be just and proper to grant an amount of Rs.5,000/- on this count against the Opposite Party. In the aforesaid authorities relied by the Complainant it is also held that any educational institution, university or school cannot be allowed to forfeit the consideration for a period for which service of coaching or training has not been provided. We thus, hold that considering the facts of this case which are not challenged by the Opposite Party, the following order needs to be passed against the Opposite Party as discussed above. Hence, the order-
O R D E R
- Complaint No.144/2013 is partly allowed against Opposite Party.
- The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.28,000/- (Rs. Twenty Eight Thousand Only) to the Complainant with interest @ 6% p.a. from 01/08/2011 till it’s realization.
- The Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant for causing mental agony and physical harassment including the cost of this complaint.
- The Opposite Party is directed to comply with the above order within one month from the date of service of this order.
- Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
