Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/15/1975

Mr. Raghu.K, S/o T.Krishna Murthy, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Principal, SLN Correspondance College, SLN Higher Education & Charitable Trust, - Opp.Party(s)

Harish & Prasad

29 May 2018

ORDER

Complaint filed on: 08.12.2015

                                                      Disposed on: 29.05.2018

 

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BENGALURU

 1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027       

 

 

CC.No.1975/2015

DATED THIS THE 29^th MAY OF 2018

 

PRESENT

 

 

SRI.S.L.PATIL, PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, MEMBER

 

Complainant/s: -                           

Mr.Raghu.K,

S/o T.Krishna Murthy,

R/at no.15, CAR Police

Head Quarters, Sirsi

Circle, Mysuru Road,

Chamarajapete,

Bengaluru-18.  

 

By Advocates

M/s.Harish & Prasad Associates     

 

V/s

Opposite party/s

Respondent/s:-

 

The Principal,

SLN Correspondence College, SLN Higher Education & Charitable Trust, no.614,

1^st main, 45^th cross,

8^th block, Jayanagar,

Between BSK Bust stop & Sangam circle,

Bengaluru-82

 

Also at no.175,

1^st floor, 15^th main,

M.C.layout, Vijayanagar, Bengaluru-40.

 

By Adv.Sri.S.Srinivasa Murthy

 

 

 

 

 

 

PRESIDENT: SRI.S.L.PATIL

 

 

            This complaint is filed by the Complainant against the Opposite party (herein after referred as Op) seeking issuance of direction to pay Rs.15,060/- with interest at 24% p.a. Further direct it to pay compensation of Rs.5 lakhs with cost and to grant such other reliefs deem fit for which the Complainant is entitled to.

 

          2. The brief facts of the case of the Complainant are that, after completion of his SSLC & DMLT approached Op for continuing his education by joining B.Sc (MLT). The Op have introduced himself as he is providing government approved and UGC recognized courses for obtaining degrees in many subjects and branches. The Op has also informed the Complainant that Op institution is authorized study centre of Kuvempu University, Karnataka State Open University and other several universities in India having branches at different places of Bengaluru. Further Op has assured that he will provide all necessary requirements to the Complainant to study B.Sc (MLT) in Karnataka State Open University (hereinafter referred as KSOU). The Complainant further submits that, he got admitted to Op’s institution for B.Sc (MLT) degree from KSOU (Mysuru) through correspondence on assurance that Op will make arrangements for admission to said university for B.Sc (MLT) degree through correspondence with complete study materails and will conduct regular classes every day by the eminent faculty. Towards the services to be provided the Op has received a sum of Rs.1,560/- on 10.04.15 towards registration fee and Rs.13,500/- on 12.05.15 towards exam fees for first year B.Sc (MLT) totally amounting to Rs.15,060/-. The Complainant further submits that, Op did not conducted the classes regularly. As per the schedule, Op was supposed to conduct the classes regularly with study materials and the coaching should have been given by the eminent faculty. But the Op failed to conduct the classes regularly by the eminent faculty with necessary study materials. To the utter shock and surprise to the Complainant, the Op informed the Complainant that, Op failed to make arrangements to the Complainant to write first year B.Sc (MLT) examinations in the said university which was held on August 2015. The Complainant further submits that, due to dishonest and irresponsible act of Op, the Complainant could not take the first year B.Sc (MLT) examinations in the said university. The self-preparations made by him to write the said exam, the precious time spent and hard work of the Complainant for the preparations went in vein. Further due to the dishonest and irresponsible act of Op, the Complainant lost one year of time which cannot be brought back or be compensated. The Op being running a responsible institution has caused hardship, mental agony and irreparable loss to the. By not providing opportunity to write the first year B.Sc (MLT) examinations. In this context he issued legal notice dtd.29.09.15 claiming as prayed in the complaint but Op did not comply. Hence prays to allow the complaint.

 

3. On receipt of the notice, Op did appear and filed version.  The sum and substance of the version of the Op are that, the complaint filed by the Complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts, hence liable to be dismissed. The Op submits that, the Complainant voluntarily approached the Op seeking admission for the first year B.Sc (MLT) Medical Lab Technology Course at KSOU Mysore in the month of April/May 2015. The Complainant after coming to know the procedures gave the application on 12.05.15 without the supporting documents. The Complainant was supposed to furnish his passport size photographs and other qualifying certificates viz marks cards of SSLC, Diploma in MLT and the convocation certificate to enable the Op to send it to ALGOL Universal Trust and also to KSOU in due course of time which is fixed. The Complainant has not furnished the required photos and the documents viz Marks cards of SSLC, Diploma in MLT and the convocation certificate. The Complainant gave only one photograph which has been affixed on the application form and has not furnished the required documents. The Complainant did not submit all the required documents and requested the Op to rant some time to fulfill all the conditions stipulated in the application for being registered in the KSOU.  The Op further submits that, the Complainant was allowed; time to submit the application pending consideration of the production of the documents. It was also made clear to him that his application would be submitted to ALGOL Universal trust which in turn will sent it to KSOU only after submission of the requisite documents. The Complainant was also aware of the fact that the Op is not conducting any regular classes/coaching since it is not a regular/full time college to offer regular classes/coaching or for that matter issuing any materials on its own. The Complainant only after knowing and understanding the procedure and how the other students enroll in the Op, volunteered to enroll himself for the First B.Sc (MLT) course. In the meanwhile, the University Grants Commission (UGC) Delhi, derecognized the courses offered by the KSOU, Mysore and hence from June 2015 all the admissions made to the KSOU, Mysore were withheld by the UGC.  The Op soon intimated the same to the Complainant through mail ‘Titled – KSOU admission application cancelled’ dtd.22.09.15 after all the reasonable efforts made by the Op to get the Complainant’s admission done at KSOU, Mysore through ALGOL universal trust. The Op further submits that, even to this day the status of recognition of KSOU by UGC is under stalemate. Therefore even if the centre had complied with all the conditions and all formalities of admissions it would not have been possible for the Op to do anything about the UGC derecognizing KSOU. Under these circumstances it would have been ideal for Complainant to seek admission in any other institution which conducts regular classes at affordable rates. Nothing prevented the Complainant to get himself enrolled in any other institution which provides such facilities at the price at which he wanted to get enrolled in the KSOU. Instead of making any attempt to pursue the right course he has indulged in all the activities which a student cannot even imagine and approach this forum by abusing the process of Law. Therefore the Complainant cannot take advantage of his own wrongs to make an unlawful gain at the cost of the Op. The Op informed the Complainant about the current status and the developments that are taking place in this regard. It also came up in several newspapers. The Op also informed the Complainant to take back his amount by submitting the original receipts issued by Op. When thing stood thus, the Complainant on 15.09.15 with another unconcerned person barged in to Op’s office situated at 8^th Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru when the authorities of the Op had gone to KSOU, Mysore on official work and there were only lady staff members present in the institution. The Complainant behaved indecently with them and also manhandled them. Further the Complainant and his fellow person damaged Op’s office property by throwing stones and breaking the glass windows. In fact he has instructed to take action as he is the son of police constable. At the instance the Op’s staff members decided to lodge a complaint against the Complainant. However, the Complainant requested the Op’s staff members not to lodge a complaint against him and assured that he would come to the Op’s head office for surrendering the original fee receipts and take back the amount. However, even after repeated reminders by Op through email and phone calls, requesting him to take back the fees, has not turned up. Instead of collecting the money back, the Complainant misguided the Op by giving wrong information as to ‘not to disturb him’ as he was busy settling some personal property disputes and that he shall come shortly to the Op’s office to collect the fee refund. Therefore, further submits that, even if the Complainant had complied with all the conditions and all the formalities of admissions are completed within the last date for submission of the application, it would not have been possible for the Op to do anything in the absence of the UGC granting recognition to KSOU. Therefore Complainant cannot take advantage of his wrong to make an unlawful and windfall gain at the cost of Op. Hence on these grounds and other grounds prays for dismissal of the complaint.

         

          4. The Complainant to substantiate his case filed affidavit evidence and got marked the documents as Ex-A1 to A8. The Co-ordinator of Op college filed affidavit evidence and got marked the documents as Ex-B1 to B20. Both filed written arguments. Heard both side.

  

5. The points that arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether the Complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of Op, if so, whether he entitled for the relief sought for ?    
2. What order ?

                   

           

 

6.  Our answers to the above points are as under:

 

Point no.1: In the Negative.  

Point no.2: As per the final order for the following

 

REASONS

 

          7. Point no.1:  We have briefly stated the contents of the complaint as well as the version filed by the Op. The contents of the version at para IV 1 to 10 are self-explanatory which are in respect of KSOU grants certificates to whomsoever applies for registration for a particular course and passes the exams conducted in its various study centers and also through its affiliated institutions. In this context, the say of Op is that, the Complainant, he himself voluntarily approached the Op seeking admission for the first year B.Sc (MLT) Medical Lab Technology Course at KSOU Mysore in the month of April/May 2015. The Complainant after coming to know the procedures, gave the application on 12.05.15 without supporting documents to process his application.  In this context, Op has informed the Complainant to furnish necessary documents. Inspite of repeated requests, except paying Rs.13,500/- towards course/exam fees and Rs.1,560/- towards registration fee, he did not furnish necessary documents. It is also the case of the Op that, it was made it clear that, admission procedure requires documents. In the meanwhile, the University Grants Commission (UGC) Delhi, derecognized the courses offered by the KSOU, Mysore and hence from June 2015 all the admissions made to the KSOU, Mysore were withheld by the UGC.  In this context, Op immediately intimated the same to the Complainant through mail ‘Titled – KSOU admission application Cancelled’ dtd.22.09.15 after all the reasonable efforts made by the Op to get the Complainant’s admission done at KSOU, Mysore through ALGOL universal trust. As per the case of the Op, email text sent to the Complainant is as under:

• As you are aware through various sources like newspapers, television news etc., that the said university-KSOU is not granted recognition renewal by UGC and the course collaborator M/s.ALGOL University Trust, Faridabad has informed us recently that your application is rejected by them keeping in view your long term interests.
• We sincerely advise you to not insist on taking admission in to the said B.Sc (MLT) at KSOU due to UGC withdrawing its recognition to run Para-Medical and Technical courses in distance education mode.
• We regret to inform you that your application for admission to B.Sc (MLT) cannot be processed at the KSOU, Mysore.
• Please submit the original fee receipts issued by us for claiming full fee refund.
• We shall however also explore at the earliest the possibility of admitting you in to the same course at a different university.

 

Emphasis supplied by us

 

    8. Though this fact has been informed to the Complainant, but he has taken law in his hand, illegally entered in to the office of the Op and behaved in rude manner with lady staff members of the Op. In this context, complaint has been lodged against the Complainant in the jurisdictional police station which can be seen at Ex-B18. It is evident that in the said email, Op has given an option to the Complainant to submit the original fee receipts issued by it for claiming full fee refunded. But this offer has been not availed by the Complainant. Knowing fully well that, Op is ready to refund the fee paid by him, he sent legal notice through his counsel as per Ex-A3 dtd.29.09.15. To the said notice, the Op has replied as per Ex-A8, wherein it has been specifically mentioned at para 5 stating that:

5. My client requested to instruct your client to take back the fees paid by him since the University Grants Commission has cancelled the educational programs of KSOU, Mysore and admission of students.

 

      9. Inspite of reply notice duly served on the Complainant and his counsel, but the Complainant knock the door of this forum for seeking the relief of, to refund the fee paid by him of Rs.15,060/- (Rs.13,500/- + Rs.1,560/-) with interest at 24% p.a. and compensation of Rs.5 lakhs and cost of litigation. In our considered view, though Op is ready to process the course/exam fees of Rs.13,500/- as well as the registration fees of Rs.1,560/- in all Rs.15,060/- as shown under Ex-A1  & A2, but the Complainant did not respond for the reason best known to him. He may be under the apprehension that, the case being registered against him in the jurisdictional police and the police may take action. When the Op is ready to refund the course/exam fees and registration fees paid under Ex-A1 & A2, the Complainant did not respond. Instead of approaching Op, he had knock the door of this forum without any valid reasons. When such being the fact, we do not find any laxity much less the deficiency of service on the part of Op. Hence complaint filed by the Complainant is deserves to be dismissed. Anyhow an option kept open to the Complainant to approach the Op with the original receipts found at Ex-A1 & A2 for the refund of the amount paid by him, in all amounting to Rs.15,060/-. Accordingly we answered the point no.1 in the negative.

 

         10. Point no.2: In the result, we passed the following:

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

          The complaint filed by the Complainant is dismissed devoid of any merits.

 

2. Anyhow an option kept open to the Complainant to approach the Op with the original receipts found at Ex-A1 & A2 for the refund of the amount paid by him, in all amounting to Rs.15,060/-.

 

          3. Looking to the circumstances of the case, we direct both the parties to bear their own cost.   

 

          Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 29^th May 2018).

 

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT

                                                                        

1. Witness examined on behalf of the complainant/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.Raghu.K, who being the complainant was examined. 

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

 

Ex-A1 & A2	Original receipts
Ex-A3	Legal notice
Ex-A4 & A5	Postal receipts
Ex-A6	Postal acknowledgement
Ex-A7	Unserved postal cover
Ex-A8	Reply of Op

 

2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s Respondent/s by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.V.Sathyaprakash, who being the Co-ordinator of Op college was examined.

 

 

 

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite party/s

 

Ex-B1	Application form
Ex-B2 & B3	Receipts
Ex-B4	SSLC marks card of the Complainant
Ex-B5 to B12	Certificate issued by PARA medical board and marks card
Ex-B13	Notice
Ex-B14 to B17	4 Returned envelopes with acknowledgements
Ex-B18	Police complaint
Ex-B19 & B20	News paper report about KSOU

 

 

 

 

(ROOPA.N.R)     MEMBER

(S.L.PATIL)  PRESIDENT