Complaint filed on: 23-07-2010 Disposed on: 19-11-2010 BEFORE THE BANGALORE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, NO.8, SAHAKARA BHAVAN, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052 C.C.No.1698/2010 DATED THIS THE 19th NOVEMBER 2010 PRESENT SRI.D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER Complainant: - Lokanath.K, Advocate, No.2/1, 2nd Main, 5th Cross, Gandhinagar, Opp. Kanishka Hotel, Bangaluru – 560 009 V/s Opposite parties: - 1. The Brigade School @ Gate Way, Rep. by the Principal, No.26/1, Brigade Enclave, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Malleshwaram West, Bangaluru-55 2. Sri.S.R.Kiran, Senior Coordinator, No.26/1, Brigade Enclave, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Malleshwaram West, Bengaluru- 55 O R D E R SRI. D.KRISHNAPPA., PRESIDENT., Brief facts of the complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite parties are, that he got his child admitted to Ops school on 3-6-2010 to study in UKG. At the time of admission, Ops have collected registration fee of Rs.75,000/- through demand draft and Rs.22,500/- towards three months tuition fee. Thus, in all he paid Rs.97,500-00 to the Ops. At the time of admission, Ops had assured that the class timings would be 11.30 AM to 3.30 PM and would provide transportation facilities and that school is going to start from 2nd week of June 2010 onwards, but School did not start from 2nd week of June 2010 and till 17-6-2010. Ops had not arranged transportation but promised to arrange transportation facilities. But Ops neglected to provide transportation therefore he had to take his child to the school by himself. As the result, he as an advocate lost his professional income to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/-. He had addressed a letter to the Ops on 28-6-2010 expressing his difficulties. Then he in that letter expressed his intention not to send his child to Ops school and requested them to refund the money paid by him, Ops though told him to wait for few days, but latter on the Ops refused to refund his money, on the ground that the registration fee can not be refunded and they have no such policy. Then he issued a legal notice on 8-7-2010 demanding refund of his money and compensation. The complainant therefore has prayed for a direction to the Ops to refund his money and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and to award costs. 2. OPs have appeared through their advocate and filed version admitting admission of the child of the complainant to their school for the academic year 2010-11 on 17-6-2010. It is further stated that registration fee paid is not refundable and subject to that condition the child was admitted. Through letter dated 14-6-2010 the complainant was notified that bus route and cost are being worked out and students will have to be dropped to school by their parents. That the complainant was required to give an application for availing transportation facilities but did not give such application. Denying any negligence or deficiency in their service have contended that the complainant was required to pay 2nd and 3rd term fee a sum of Rs.50,000/- and therefore denying their liability to pay any amount to the complainant have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and the principle of OP No.1 have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant alongwith the complaint has produced copies of fee receipts and a copy of legal notice he got issued to the Ops. The Ops have produced a copy of application given by the complainant for admission of his child with a copy of e-mail. We have heard the complainant who is in person, counsel for the Ops and perused the records. 4. On the above materials following points for determination arise. 1) Whether the complainant proves that the OPs have caused deficiency in their service in not refunding entire fee paid by him? 2) To what reliefs, the complainant is entitled to? 5. Our findings are as under: Point no.1: Answered in part in the affirmative Point no.2: See the final Order REASONS 6. Answer on Point No.1: As could be seen from the contention canvased by both the parties, there is no dispute between them. In this complainant’s child having been admitted to Ops school on 3-6-2010 for studying in UKG during academic year 2010-11 and in this complainant having had paid Rs.75,000/- towards registration fee and Rs.22,500/- towards quarterly tuition fee. 7. The complainant alleges that at the time of admission, the Ops had promised to provide transportation but did not arrange. Therefore he had to take the child by himself to the school and back home. As the result, his professional work as an advocate suffered therefore he with drew the child from the school and demanded for refund of money. Ops have contended that the registration fee is not refundable one and it was within the knowledge of the complainant. It is further contended by them, that through letter dated 14-6-2010 they had informed the parents that cost and route of the bus being worked out and parents were required to drop and pickup their child. It is further stated that the complainant was required to give an application for availing bus facilities but did not give. The fact that the Ops had assured to provide transportation facility is not denied by the Ops, the complainant contention that after knowing transportation facilities would be available to the students and he believing it admitted his child to the Ops school is not denied by the Ops. The Ops who had agreed to provide transportation, admittedly did not arrange the same, eventhough class had commenced. No doubt, Ops through an e-mail shown to had informed the complainant that the parents had to drop and pickup the children until the transportation commenced. But the OPs nowhere stated to have arranged the transportation facility evenafter commencement of classes in the entire month of June-2010. The Ops even through their e-mail dated 25-1-2010 sent to the complainant have informed the complainant that transportation facility would be arranged and communicated in due course of time. But it is found that Ops did not arrange transportation facility till end of June-10, the complainant finding it inconvenient to take the child by himself to the school and back, changed his mind to withdraw his child and communicated his intention to the Ops. 8. As per the attendance register extract produced by the Ops, complainant’s child found had attended classes upto 25-6-2010 and latter on remained absent. Therefore it is not that the complainant’s daughter attended classes for considerable length and then she was withdrawn. We agree, if any students admitted to a school latter on voluntarily withdrawn and by that withdrawal, if the Ops or any school suffers any financial loss or its academic course or arrangement is affected adversely, then the student or his beneficiary is not entitled for refund of fee paid. The test to be applied in the cases, this type is whether withdrawal of student has caused any financial loss to the Ops or adversely affected its academic calendar is to be considered. 9. Admittedly the complainant’s child is withdrawn during June-2010 which is at the beginning of the academic year. Admittedly the Ops had been given permission to admit upto 50 students to UKG but the Ops were able to get only 19 admissions for that year. Therefore it is not that the Ops had made arrangements for 50 students for that year and any withdrawal from the school would result in unmanageable loss. The complainant’s child being one of 19 students, the complainant considering the age of the child non-availability of the transportation facility and his professional inconvenience informed the Ops and withdrew the child. The reason in our view is adequate and the Ops therefore cannot compel the student to continue. The complainant thus is entitled for refund of fee paid proportionately after deducting certain amount towards the process fee and expenditure incurred by the Ops on the student. As stated above the daughter of the complainant attended 8 classes only during June-2010. Thereafter, it is not a case of the Ops that they have incurred expenditure on the complainant’s daughter by supplying uniform and books and any other study materials and therefore are entitled to withhold the entire money. The contention of the Ops that registration fee for Rs.75,000/- is not refundable cannot be sustained. The condition of non refundability, besides unilateral one, considering the class for which daughter of the complainant was admitted, registration fee charged is total abnormal, and having collected such a huge amount, the Ops cannot stand non refundability, if parent of the students for their own reason withdraw a student and when school authority has not proved the adverse effect of such withdrawal and financial loss, they can not with hold entire fee paid. Thus considering all these aspects of the matter, we find it just and reasonable to allow deduction of Rs.10,000/- from out of amount paid by the complainant and direct the Ops to refund the balance amount. With the result, we answer point No.1 in the affirmative and pass the following order: ORDER Complaint is allowed in part. OPs are jointly and severally are directed to refund Rs.87,500/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order. Failing which, they shall pay interest at 10% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment. Op shall also pay cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. Dictated to the Stenographer, Got it transcribed and corrected, Pronounced on the Open Forum on this 19th November 2010. Member President
| | [HONORABLE Anita Shivakumar. K] Member[HONORABLE Sri D.Krishnappa] PRESIDENT | |
