By. Smt. Beena. M, Member:-
This is a complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.
2. Brief facts of the case are given below:-
The Complainant joined in the Opposite Party’s institute to study 5 year Bachelor of Architecture (B. Arch) course during the period 2021-2022, after completing his Plus Two Education with 92.8% marks and has qualified JEE Aptitude Test and has paid the registration fee of Rs.50,000/- on 14.09.2021, but after one month, he had received a notice from the Opposite Party saying that passing NATA Aptitude Test is compulsory for joining Bachelor of Architecture (B. Arch) course from 2021 academic year onwards. So, he was directed to choose any other course for compensating the registration fees he already paid. However, the Complainant did not accept the offer because he did not find any other course fit to fulfil his wishes and taste. So, the Complainant requested the Opposite Party to refund the amount paid for registration fees but the Opposite party denied to refund the amount without any reasonable ground. Due to the negligent act of the Opposite Party, the Complainant lost one academic year and caused heavy damage. Hence, the Complainant is entitled to get a refund of Rs.50,000/- he paid as registration fees and compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- and Rs.50,000/- as cost.
2. After the admission of the Complaint, the Commission issued summons to the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party appeared, but failed to file version within a stipulated time and hence the Commission set them ex-parte.
3. The Complainant had adduced oral evidence. He was examined as PW1 and the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A3. The Opposite Party prayed to be allowed to cross-examine the Complainant. But the Opposite Party was not allowed to cross-examine the Complainant since the version was not accepted.
4. On going through the Complaint, it is seen that the Complaint is related to education. The allegation of the Complainant is that there has been deficiency in service from the part of the Opposite Party. Therefore, a brief discussion of the term ‘’service’’ is seen inevitable in this context. Sec. 2 (42) of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 has defined the term ‘’service’’. According to sec. 2(42) ‘’service’’ means service of any description which is made available to potential users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding or lodging or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service. In the above definition, though banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, telecom, boarding or both, housing construction, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information etc are included, the very important subject education is seen not included specifically. So, Commission is of the view that the legislative intention was to exclude the subject ‘’education’’ from the definition of service.
5. Moreover, in Revision Petition No.2006 of 2019 filed before the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in The Principal LDRP Institute of Technology and Research Vs Apoorv Sharma, the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 11.10.2022, in its judgement has held that educational institutions do not come under the purview of Consumer Protection Act, as ‘’Education’’ is not a service-excluding coaching centers.
6. Therefore, this Complaint is not legally maintainable before this Commission as education is not considered to be service as defined in the Consumer Protection Act. Hence the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the result Complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 26th day of July 2023.
Date of Filing:- 09.12.2021.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
APPENDIX.
Witness for the Complainant:-
PW1. Abhay Geroge Korah. Student.
Witness for the Opposite Party:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Eligibility Criteria Published by Opposite Party.
A2. Copy of Fee Receipt. Dt:14.09.2021.
A3. Copy of Email Request for refund of money.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-
Nil.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CDRC, WAYANAD.
Kv/-
