Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 346.
Instituted on : 05.07.2023
Decided on : 08.05.2024
Akshit Manderna minor through his father, Guardian and next friend Rishi Raj s/o Sh. Rohtash Singh Age: 40 years. R/o 1637, Sector 3, Rohtak.
……….………….Complainant.
Vs.
- The Manager, Aakash Educational Services Ltd. Branch office 1st 2nd 3rd floor, Lather Complex, Near Chotu Ram Stadium, Sonipat Road, Rohtak- 124001.
- The Director, Aakash Education Services Ltd. Branch Office 1st 2nd 3rd floor, Lather Complex, Near Chotu Ram Stadium, Sonipat Road, Rohtak- 124001.
...........……Respondents/opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Sh.Sandeep Kumar Hooda, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Gulshan Chawla, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that on 12.01.2022, the complainant had enrolled for two year engineer course with respondents and had paid a total fee to the tune of Rs.1,64,054/- i.e. Rs.5000/- on 12.01.2022 as
Security Amount, 11,999/- on 12.01.2022 as Course fee and Rs.147055/-on 25.01.2022 as Course fee. The complainant had attended the classes for one year.
After attending the classes for one year, the complainant had felt that coaching classes of complainant were not beneficial to him as the coaching classes were overcrowded and the strength was in very high volume in every batch. After discussion with his son and after thinking seriously about it, the father of complainant has decided that his son should opt out from the course. On 20.04.2023 the father of complainant had sent an email regarding refund of advance fees and also intimated the respondents regarding opting out of complainant from the course. He also sent an application regarding the refund of advance fee through registered post on 26.04.2023 but without any fruitful result. After that the father of complainant visited office of respondents/opposite parties on 12.06.2023 personally and also moved an application regarding refund which was duly received by respondents on 14.06.2023 but no refund of advance fee was received by complainant till date. The act and conduct of respondents is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that respondents may kindly be directed to refund the amount of Rs.90,525/- (Rs. 5000 security fee+ Rs.85,525/-Advance fee) along with interest and also to pay Rs.20,000/- on account of mental agony & harassment etc. caused to the complainant due to deficiency in service on the part of the respondents and to pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation expense to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that complainant namely Akshit Manderna approached the opposite parties for getting admission in First Step integrated course for JEE (Mains & Advance) for two years. At the time of admission opposite party informed & discussed everything related to Syllabus, Fee structure, terms and conditions and refund policy of the course at length with complainant and his guardian. They duly agreed & accepted the terms & conditions of the admission form, refund policy and undertaking. It is further submitted that the total cost of the said course was Rs.260,364/- whereas the same was offered to complainant for Rs.159,054/- after giving a concession of 60.44% (including lumpsum payment concession of 14%) in total tuition fee by opposite party. It is denied that complainant left the coaching classes because classes were not beneficial to him as the classes were overcrowded and the strength was high in volume in every batch. It is quite strange that complainant had attended classes for one year in OP's institute but neither he nor his guardian ever raised any objections, never complained regarding the overcrowded classes or classes were not beneficial for him. The complainant left the course/institute due to reasons best known to him and not due to the fault of opposite parties. Opposite parties duly informed the complainant that he is liable for refund of security amount of Rs.5,000/- but he refused to accept said amount. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied. It is prayed that complaint may kindly be dismissed with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and closed his evidenced on 14.09.2023. Ld. Counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and thereafter failed to conclude its evidence and the evidence of opposite parties was closed by the order dated 10.04.2024 of this Commission.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. As per the fee receipt Ex.C1, complainant had paid an amount of Rs.5000/- as security deposit on 12.01.2022, Rs.11,999/- on 12.01.2022 as Course fee and Rs.147055/-on 25.01.2022 as Course fee. As per the application Ex.C2 dated 20.04.2023, it is submitted by the father of the complainant that his son do not want to pursue for the second year course in the academy of opposite party and requested the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.5000/-(security) plus Rs.85526/-(course fee). Complainant also sent a reminder Ex.C3 vide registered post receipt dated 26.04.2023 and 3rd reminder Ex.C4 dated 12.06.2023 with the opposite parties which was received by the opposite parties on 14.06.2023. But despite repeated requests of the complainant, amount of fee has not been refunded to the complainant. We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In this case, the complainant had applied for refund of fee before starting the 2nd year batch as he was not satisfied with the coaching of opposite parties. On the other hand, opposite parties was having the opportunity to fill the seat as vacated by the complainant. Hence they have not suffered any loss and as such the fee of second year of the complainant was to be refunded to the complainant. But the opposite parties refused for the same. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties are liable to refund the 2nd year fee to the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.5000/- deposited as security amount and Rs.79527/-(50% of Rs.159054/-) total Rs.84527/-(Rupees eighty four thousand five hundred and twenty seven only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 05.07.2023 till its realization and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
08.05.2024.
........................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member
