Complaint filed on: 28-07-2012
Disposed on: 22-02-2013
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.1548/2012
DATED THIS THE 22nd FEBRUARY 2013
PRESENT
SRI.J.N.HAVANUR, PRESIDENT
SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA, MEMBER
Complainant: -
Sivaraman.H,
2C, 301, “Hari Niketan”
Kasthuri Nagar, East of NGEF layout, Near Bharat Gas Godown,
Bangalore-16
V/s
Opposite party: -
The Principal,
Royale Concorde International
School, 6th B Main, Kalyana Nagar,
HRBR layout, 2nd block,
Bangalore-43
ORDER
SRI.J.N.HAVANUR, PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed by the complainant against the OP, praying to pass an order, directing the OP to refund Rs.25,100=00 to him, in the interest of justice.
2. The brief facts of the complaint can be stated as under.
The complainant admitted his daughter in class 11th in one of the CBSE schools in Bangalore by name Royale Concorde International School, Bangalore who being the OP in this case, and he has paid the first term fees of Rs.25,100=00 on 14-4-2012, and the daughter of the complainant attended the school for just 12 working days till 20-6-2012. In the meanwhile, she got admission in Kendriya Vidyalaya on 19-6-2012 which is also a good school and the fees are comparatively very less. Now, the Principal and the management of OP are denying refunding the fees paid either fully or partly. The complainant tried his level best to request to refund back the fees amount atleast partly, but the OP very clear that fees once paid can never be paid back under any circumstances. Is it correct on the part of the school to refuse the amount paid by the complainant, though he has no interest in continuing his daughter there. Is it at the pure discretion of the school management, the complainant has also given the letter to BEO, KR Puram on 13-7-2012 to get him refund to the best of his capacity. Hence, the present complaint is filed, praying to refund Rs.25,100=00 to him, in the interest of justice.
3. After service of the notice, the OP has appeared through its counsel and filed objection, contending interalia as under.
The complaint of the complainant is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed in limine. It is not in dispute that, the complainant’s daughter Ms.Poojitha.S was admitted for class 11th with OP school and paid a sum of Rs.25,100=00 as a first term fees on 17-4-2012 through a cheque. At the time of admission of the student in the OP school, in the application form it is clearly mentioned that undertaken given by the parents that “I agree to pay the fees on time as per the rules and I am fully aware that fees once paid is not refundable or transferable”, and thereby the fees once paid cannot be refunded at any point of time. The OP school is a recognized school and affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education, Govt. of India, New Delhi, as per the norms of the Central Board of Secondary Education, the OP school has to maintain certain rules and regulations. The admission will open for each academic year in the month of March and same will be closed in the month of April. The said time is also fixed by the CBSC, New Delhi and thereby once the OP school taken the admissions and took the approval for each academic year and commencing the curriculum for an academic year, the OP cannot take new admissions. Once academic year begins the OP school management will arrange teaching and non teaching staff alongwith salaries and payments, and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP. But the complainant failed to send his daughter for education at OP school, so the complaint is not maintainable. The OP school never made any objections to send complainant’s daughter for her education and the OP was always ready to provide service for the amount which they have taken from the complainant. The said fact was well within the knowledge of the complainant himself and he himself has given undertaking that, he will not be refunded or transfer the fees which he has paid and the said fact was also intimated to the parents like complainant in the fee structure for the academic year 2012-13. Thereby the complainant has no right to ask to refund of fee, and further due to the said clauses there is no contractual liability on the part of the OP school. The complainant had requested OP school for refund of fees of his daughter, by that time, the school admissions were over for the academic year 2012-13 and there was no chance to the OP to take a new admission in the place of daughter of the complainant, thereby it is clear that, the OP school has provided a seat for daughter of the complainant and it can be seen through the attendance register. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaint, in the interest of justice.
4. So from the averments of the complaint of complainant and objection of the OP, the following points arise for our consideration.
1. Whether the complainant proves that, there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP, in not refunding the fees?
2. If point no.1 is answered in the affirmative, what relief, the complainant is entitled to?
3. What order?
5. Our findings on the above points are;
Point no.1: In the affirmative
Point no.2: The complainant is entitled to
Rs.20,100=00 along with cost of
Rs.2,000=00 from the OP
Point no.3: For the following order
REASONS
6. So as to prove the case, the complainant has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and produced five documents. On the other hand, one V.Bheemegowda who being an authorized person has filed his affidavit and produced three documents with list dated 17-12-2012, authority letter and one order copy of the Director of Education. We have heard the arguments of both sides, and we have gone through the oral and documentary evidence of both parties meticulously.
7. One Sivaraman.H who being the complainant has stated in his affidavit that, his daughter Ms.Poojitha.S got admission in Kendriya Vidyalaya, DRDO on 19-6-2012. The very purpose of existing from OP school is its exorbitant amount of fees. The annual fees, they charge is Rs.69,200=00 which is more than three times fees charged in KV, DRDO. His daughter got the transfer certificate from the OP school on 20-6-2012. The OP school was duly informed well in advance the reason for leaving the school. As a middle class parent, he had no choice, but to admit his daughter during the month of April 2012, as the admission for the 11th standard class will be closed, even though the results of CBSE 10th board exam are declared in the last week of May 2012. The OP school does not sell any product or commodity. They need to understand that, they do service for a social cause. KV schools in Bangalore offer the same quality CBSE education at a very affordable cost, the total annual fees in KV DRDO is Rs.22,000=00, they start the 11th standard admission only after the results of CBSE 10th standard are declared, usually during the first week of June every year. As a responsible parent, how can he wait for admission of KC schools, KV schools give preference to central Govt. Employees children, single girl child, SC/STs, merit takes a back seat when it comes to reservation in India. His daughter scored a perfect 10 out of 10 in CBSE 10th Board exam, inspite of it, her name appeared only in the second admission list of both KV DRDO as well as KV NAL schools. The first admission list in both KV schools was made based on reservation. Most of the private schools including the OP school know this fact and want to take maximum advantage of this situation and they start admission process much ahead of time, collect very high fees. Education is done more as a business. Private schools exploit middle class and poor society people. Please note that, the application and prospectus in the OP school cost Rs.1,000=00, where as it is free in KV schools. Even uniform, shoes are all expensive in OP school. OP school prospectus has not mentioned anything about annual fees maintenance fees, which they have collected from him. He was not given a single chance by OP school to speak to the top management, so he was forced to approach the consumer forum to get justice. When the OP school does provide quality education as a profitable business why not they refund the fees when a student goes out of the institution for whatever reason, the OP school makes lot of money by imparting quality education; they have opened one more branch school in Yalahanka, Bangalore from this academic year 2012-13. There are instances where top institutions like IIM Bangalore have refunded the entire 10% MBA course fees, when students opt out of the course for various reasons. So it is prayed to allow the complaint and refund fees amount to him as prayed in the complaint.
8. By a careful reading of the averments of complaint and evidence of complainant as mentioned above, it is made explicitly clear that, the complainant has given his evidence in accordance with the averments of complaint. Let us have a look at the relevant documents of complainant, so as to know whether the oral testimony of complainant is supported by documentary evidence or not. Document no.1 of the complainant is the copy of receipt issued by the OP for having received Rs.25,100=00 from the complainant, collected towards fees of his daughter for 11th standard. Document no.2 is the copy transfer certificate given by the OP in the name of complainant’s daughter on 23-6-2012, and as per the said document, it is transpired that, the complainant’s daughter attended the OP school for 12 days. Document no.3 is the copy of letter of the complainant dated 19-6-2012 in the name of the Principal of OP school stating that, his daughter got admission to Kendriya Vidyalaya for 11th standard, as he has no plan to continue her studies in OP school, so he requested to refund the amount of Rs.25,100=00. The complainant has produced prospectus of OP school wherein at page no.35, there is a heading of withdrawal, it is stated that, if a student is withdrawn from the school, a notice of atleast 30 days must be given, otherwise the fees for that period will become payable, and withdrawal notice must be given in writing by the parents only, and no refund will be given for the tuition fees paid. One more book called diary of OP school is produced by the complainant wherein at page no.29, it is stated that, fees once paid will not be refunded; no refund will be claimed for the fees paid, even if the student leaves before the end of it. The said prospectus and diary of the OP institution makes it clear that, there is no provision in the said prospectus for refund of money paid by the parents by deducting a nominal sum. The entire book of OP school is silent on the point of refund of fees to the parents.
9. At this stage, it is relevant to have a look at the oral and documentary evidence of OP. One V.Bheemegowda who being an authorized person of OP school has stated in his affidavit that, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP, but the complainant failed to send his daughter for education at OP school, so the complaint is not maintainable. The OP school never made any objections to send the complainant’s daughter for her education, and the OP was always ready to provide service for the amount received. The complainant has given undertaken that, he will not be refunded or transfer the fees which he has paid, so the complainant has no right to ask to refund of fee. The complainant had requested OP school for refund of fee of daughter of complainant and by that time the school admissions were closed and there was no chance to the OP to take a new admission in place of complainant’s daughter, so it is prayed to dismiss the complaint .
10. The OP has produced an application form of the complainant’s daughter given by the complainant dated 7-2-2012 for getting admission to the 11th standard, and as per the said document, it is seen that, the complainant’s daughter was admitted to the OP school on 16-4-2012. Document no.2 of the OP is the copy of Fees structure of OP school, and that document discloses that, for 11th and 12th standards first installment is of Rs.25,100=00 and total annual fees collection for the said standard is of Rs.69,200=00. Document no.3 is the copy of attendance extract of OP school, wherein at Sl.no.15, the name of the complainant’s daughter is found figured, and that document show that, the complainant’s daughter attended the classes only for 13 days in the month of June 2012, and the transfer certificate (TC) was issued in the name of the complainant’s daughter.
11. By a careful reading of the oral and documentary evidence of both parties, it is no doubt true that, the complainant’s daughter was admitted to the OP school in the month of April 2012 for 11th standard by paying the first installment of Rs.25,100=00, and the complainant’s daughter got admission to Kendriya Vidyalaya, so the complainant got transfer certificate (TC) of his daughter on 23-6-2012 and submitted an application to the OP school on 19-6-2012 requesting to refund an amount paid by him as his daughter has been admitted to Kendriya Vidyalaya School, since the OP did not pay the amount. So the complainant has come up with the present complaint, praying to refund the amount alongwith interest. Documents of the OP go to reveal that, once fees paid to the school, it is nonrefundable and students can withdraw from the school by giving 30 days notice by parents of the students. It is an admitted fact between the parties that, after getting admission in the OP school, the daughter of complainant has attended only 12 days in the month of June 2012, and on 23-6-2012 the complainant took transfer certificate (TC) of his daughter to get an admission to Kendriya Vidyalaya. Now, the main point to be considered is whether the complainant is entitled to refund of fees paid to OP or not. Undoubtedly, the OP is running educational institution by collecting fees from general public and impart education to the students who take admission to the OP school for a particular academic year. The OP has made rules in its institution that, once fees paid by the parents, the same cannot be refunded. The said rules made by the OP in respect of non-refund of fees of the student appear to be harsh and uncalled for. The parents will always aspire to give good education to their children by taking risk and for educating their children many times, the middle class and poor parents will raise hand loan from private institution by paying exorbitant interest. So, under the circumstances, if parents face problem like the present case on hands, it is proper on the part of the OP to make relaxation of rules and refund the amount to the parents, by deducting a nominal sum towards administrative charges. But instead of doing so, the OP has made drastic rules, not to refund any amount to the parents, which appears to be not sound in the welfare society. When the OP gives transfer certificate (TC) to the complainant’s daughter for joining another school, it is the duty of the OP to refund the amount to complainant, as the OP did not give education completely to the complainant’s daughter during that particular year. If the OP is allowed to retain the amount of complainant as per the rules of OP school institution, it is nothing but allowing the OP to enrich at the cost of the complainant, and it amounts to unfair trade practice in the educational institution of the OP. So looking to the nature of the Transfer certificate (TC) granted by OP in the name of the complainant’s daughter and prayer of the complainant made in the present complaint together with intendment of legislature in making the Consumer Protection Act being a social legislation, we are of the view that since the OP did not give full education to the complainant’s daughter during particular academic year he is not expected to retain the amount of complainant by taking shelter under particular clause of prospectus of the school. So from the oral and documentary evidence of both parties, we are of the considered opinion that, the complainant who comes to forum seeking relief has proved with material evidence that OP is negligent and there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP in not refunding the fees paid by him, and accordingly, we answer this point in a affirmative.
12. It is an admitted fact that, the daughter of the complainant has attended the class of OP school for 12 or 13 days, so under the circumstance, it is just and proper to deduct a nominal sum of Rs.5,000=00 in the total amount paid by the complainant towards administrative charges, and remaining amount of Rs.20,100=00 shall be paid to the complainant. So the OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.20,100=00 to the complainant within 30 days of this order, failing which, the OP shall pay the said amount to the complainant with 9% interest per annum on the said amount from the date of this order to till the date of realization, and the OP is further directed to pay Rs.2,000=00 to the complainant towards cost of litigation, and according, we answer this point. In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
The complaint of the complainant is partly allowed. The OP is directed to refund Rs.20,100=00 (Rs.Twenty thousand and one hundred only) to the complainant within 30 days of this order, failing which, the OP shall pay the said amount to the complainant with 9% interest per annum on the said amount from the date of this order to till the date of realization.
The OP is further directed to pay Rs.2,000=00 (Rs.Two thousand only) to the complainant towards cost of litigation.
Supply free copy of this order to both parties.
Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open forum on this the 22nd day of February 2013.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
