DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

Case No.555/2012

Sh. Praveen Yadav

A-147/5, Jaitpur, Surabh Vihar,

Badarpur, New Delhi-110044                                        ….Complainant

Versus

1.       IIPM International Campus

Satbari, Chandan Haula, Chhattar Pur,

Bhati Mines Road,

New Delhi-110074                                               

2.       The Indian Institute of Planning & Management

          IIPM Corporate Office, B-11, level-5,

          Qutab Institutional Area,

New Delhi-110016                                      ……Opposite Parties

                                                Date of Institution          : 19.10.12                                                        Date of Order        :  29.11.16

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

O R D E R

In short, the case of the Complainant is that he took admission on 01.08.2012 with the OPs institution for two years MBA Course for the academic session 2012-2014 and paid the fee amount which included an amount of Rs.25,000/- as retention fee and the staff of the OPs  stated that the retention amount was refundable.  Thereafter, he had changed his mind and decided not to take admission and requested the OPs to refund the retention fees but the OPs’ staff refused to refund the amount.  Hence, there is a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP. The Complainant has prayed as under:-

1. Direct the OPs to refund the entire amount of Rs.25,000/- with interest to the Complainant
2. Direct the OPs to pay Rs.50,000/- towards physical strain and mental agony suffered by the Complainant and his family members.
3. Direct the OPs to pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- as cost of the litigation.

OPs in their written statement have stated that the Complainant was selected and asked to deposit the fees.  However, it was suggested  to him that he can arrange the bank loan but OPs never gave assurance that  they will arrange for bank loan and it was clearly mentioned that OPs will not be liable if the student is not eligible as per bank’s requirement. It is submitted that most of the students come and deposit their retention fees to block their seats in the OPs’ institute but when they get admission in some other college or institute they ask to return the retention fee. It was clearly mentioned in the selection letter after the pre- adm examination that the retention fee is not refundable but the Complainant deposited the same just to block his seat but he got admission in another college and he cooked up this story. It is denied that at any time  the Complainant was told that the said amount of fee was refundable. It is clearly mentioned on page No.77 of the prospect of OPs about the non refund of the retention fees which is non-refundable and accepted by the Complainant. OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

  Rejoinder has been filed by the Complainant.

Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Sh. Varun Verma, Assistant Manager (legal affairs) of OPs has been filed in evidence.

     Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties. 

We have heard arguments on behalf of the Complainant and have also gone through the file very carefully.

Admittedly, the Complainant had applied for admission with the OPs for two years MBA course for the session 2012-2014 and paid Rs.25,000/-  vide receipt dated 01.08.12 (for the purpose of identification we mark receipt as t Annexure-1). Annexure-2 relates to the details of the fees required to be submitted by the Complainant.

However, the copies of the receipts issued by  the OPs to the Complainant have been filed on the record wherein retention fee for two year MBA course for the session 2012-2014 has been shown as Rs.35,100/-(non refundable). Therefore, if for any reason whatsoever, the Complainant did not or could not pursue the said programme the OPs were entitled to forfeit the retention fee of Rs.35,100/- from the amount already paid by  the Complainant  to the OPs.  The Complainant had paid only Rs.25,000/- Therefore, the OPs had not refunded the retention amount to the Complainant as per terms of the letter dated 01.08.12. The Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 29.11.16.