Before the District Forum: Kurnool
Sri K.V.H. Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President
And
Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member
Sri R.Ramachandra Reddy, B. Com., LL.B., Member
Thursday the 12th day of August, 2004
C.D.No.153/2003
B.Soma Sekhara Reddy,
S/o. Late K.Kodanda Rami Reddy,
R/o. H.No. 46/299,
Budhawarpeta,
Kurnool. . . . Opposite party represented by
his counsel Sri J.Sreedhar
-Vs-
The principal,
K.S.R.M. College of Engineering,
Kadapa. . . . Opposite party represented by
his counsel Sri K.S.Sudharshan Reddy.
ORDER
(As per Smt C.Preethi, Hon’ble Lady Member)
1 This CD complaint of the complainant is filed under section 2, 11&12 of C.P.Act, 1986, seeking a direction on the opposite party to refund the advance of Rs, 74,350/- and registration fee of Rs.1,000/- with 18% interest per annum from 6.11.2001, Rs.2,000/- as compensation for mental agony, Rs.1,000/- as costs of the complaint and any such other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complaint of the complainant are that the complainant after availing bank loan paid Rs.74,350/- vide Credit Note No. 6330 on 24.9.2001, towards advance payment of N.R.I quota seat for his son and also paid Rs.200/- vide credit note No.6329 on same day towards application form fee to the opposite party. Later the opposite party demanded Rs.1,000/- towards application registration fee and the complainant complied the said demand by paying Rs.1,000/- by way of Demand Draft on 12.10.2001, sent by R.P vide R.No.4244 to the opposite party. Subsequent to that the complainant did not receive any communication or response from opposite party with regard to his son’s admission. Later the complainant’s son got Engineering payment seat at Hindupur and joined in the said College. Thereafter the complainant received a letter dt 3.11.2001from the opposite party calling to report in the college on or before 8.11.2001 with all original certificates and fees as mentioned therein. On 6.11.2001 the complainant approached the opposite party and informed his son’s admission at Hindupur College and requested to refund the advance amount paid by him and the opposite party requested one month time. Even after the lapse of 20 months the opposite party did not pay the said amount and postponing on one pretex or other. As the complainant has not admitted his son in the opposite party’s college, the payment of tuition fee, development fee, special fee doesn’t arise; therefore the amount received by opposite party as advanced has to be returned to the complainant. Being vexed with the attitude of the opposite party the complainant got issued legal notice dt 7.7.2003 send vide R.P.No. 4075 and the opposite party replied dt 18.7.2003 denying its liability. The conduct of opposite party in not refunding the advance amount is held deficiency of service to the complainant.
3. In substantiation of his case the complainant filed the following documents Viz (1) Credit Note No.6329 dt 24.9.2001 for Rs.200/- issued by opposite party towards application fee (2) Credit Note No.6330 dt 24.9.2001 for Rs,74,350/- issued by opposite party to the complainant, as advance towards N.R.I tuition fee, development fee, special fee (3) postal receipt No.4244, (4) SBI counter foil for obtaining draft for Rs.1,000/- (5) letter dt 3.11.2001 sent by opposite party to the complainant (6) legal notice dt 7.7.2003 issued by complainant’s counsel to the opposite party (7) postal acknowledgement of opposite party as to the receipt of Ex A.6 (8) Reply notice given by opposite party’s counsel to the complainant’s counsel and (9) letter dt 27.9.2003 by B.I.T Institute of Technology, Ananthapur to Branch Manager, Andhra Bank, Kurnool, besides to his sworn affidavit in reiteration of his complaint avernments and the above documents are marked as Ex A.1 to A.9 for its appreciation in this case.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this Forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite party made his appearance in this matter through his counsel and contested the case by filling denial written version, questioning the maintainability of the complainant’s case both in facts and law and requiring the complaint to the strict proof of the complaint avernments.
5. The written version of the opposite party even though admits the complainant as approached the opposite party for admission of his son for first year B. Tech, under N.R.I quota, and paid tuition fee of Rs.74,350/- and 1,000/- as application registration fee, subsequently the opposite party addressed a letter dt 3.11.2001 to the complainant intimating him to send his son for joining the college on or before 8.11.2001, along with original certificates, as the classes for first year B. Tech to be commenced from 12.11.2001, for the said letter there is no response from the complainant till the receipt of legal notice dt 7.7.2003.
6. In further submits that on the approach of complainant NRI quota seat was given and had he not approached the same would have been given to some others, and on account of non-joining of the complainant’s son, the opposite party college suffered a loss of Rs.74,350/- P.A towards tuition fee for the subsequent 3 years. It further submits the complainant never approached the opposite party for refund of the tuition fee amount, as the said tuition fee amount once paid will not be refunded under any circumstances and it is for the complainant to pay the subsequent 3 years tuition fee. There is no deficiency of service on part of opposite party for rendering service on its part as the complaint is no maintainable under this Forum and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
7. In substantiation of its case the opposite party filed his affidavit in support of his written version as evidence and suitable replied to the interrogatories filed by the complainant.
8. Hence the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is remaining entitled alleging deficiency of service on part of opposite party and his entitleness to the reliefs sought:-
9. The points which are not in dispute are that the complainant paying Rs.74,350/- as advance NRI quota tuition fee, development fee, special fee on 24.9.2001, Rs.200/- as cost of application fee on 24.9.2001 and Rs.1,000/- towards application registration fee on 12.10.2001 for admission of his son for I year B. Tech in opposite party College.
10. The complainant alleges that he paid supra stated amount as advance for NRI quota tuition fee, advance fee and special fee towards admission for first year B. Tech in opposite party’s college, the opposite party received the said amount and issued a credit note in the name of opposite party’s college vide Ex A.1 & A.2 and Ex A.4 is the counter foil for payment of Rs.1,000/- towards application registration fee. After receiving the said amount there was no information or intimation sent by the opposite party to the complainant regarding the admission of the complainant’s son to the said college, mean while the complainant’s son got payment seat at Hindupur College and joined there. Subsequent to the said joining the complainant received a letter dt 3.11.2001 from opposite party requesting to report in the college on or before 8.1.2001.The complainant on 6.11.2001 approached the opposite party and intimated about his son admission at Hindupur College and requested to return the advance paid by him but as against to it the opposite party alleges that tuition fee once paid will not be refunded under any circumstances as it is loss to the college for that year and subsequent three years also. This plea of the opposite party cannot be accepted as fees is paid by the complainant for the services of opposite party in rendering service by way of imparting education to his son and if there is no rendering of service, question of payment of fees doesn’t arise at all. In the present case the complainant’s son was neither given admission nor any information regarding his admission was forwarded to him till 3.11.2001, hence there remains laches on part of the opposite parties, therefore the opposite party cannot retain the advance tuition fee paid by the complainant to the opposite party. It is a shock to know that the students or their parents are deprived of their good hard earned money under the above dis-guise .
The complainant waited for 38 days for a call from opposite party, as there was an offer from Hindupur College to join in their college, the complainant took admission for his son in that college, hence sought for refund of tuition fee from opposite party and the refusal of the opposite party to refund the advance tuition fee of complainant’s son is not only reprehensible but also unjust, irrational and illegal. Therefore what follows is that the opposite party has not rendered any service to the complainant’s son in order to retain the tuition fee and hence there appears every bonafides of the complainant in his hesitation on the said grievance and the deficiency of service on the side of opposite party in that regard.
13. The Ex A.5 is the legal notice dt 7.7.2003 of the complainant addressed to the opposite party, the same grievances as to the request to refund the advance tuition fee paid by the complainant, Ex A.8 is the reply of the opposite party denying all the material avernments of Ex A.6 notice of the complainant as false and alleges once tuition fee paid would not be refunded under any circumstances.
14. The Ex A.7 while envisages the acknowledgement of the Ex A.6 by the opposite party and Ex A.9 is the letter dt 27.7.2003 of B.I.T. Institute Technology, Ananthapur to Andhra Bank, Branch Manager, stating that the complainant’s son joined their college vide admission No. 01F31A1230 on 30.10.2001. The facts borne in the above exhibits are not denied by the opposite party’s side. Hence from them it remains clear that the complainant paid Rs.74,350/- towards advance tuition fee for imparting education for his son in opposite party’s college, which comes under the service as contemplated under the C.P.Act, 1986.
15. The opposite party side except alleging fees once paid is not refundable under any circumstances did not place any material to substantiate its bonafides and malafides of the complainant by substantiating the same by any accepting and corroborative material.
- Hence in the said circumstances discussed above as there is clear deficiency of service of the opposite party in refusing to refund advance tuition fees paid by the complainant, as it does not rendered any service to the complainant and when no services are rendered by the opposite party, the complainant is remaining entitled to refund of advance tuition fee. The complainant is also entitled to compensation for suffering damage and mental agony he faced at the deficient conduct and the deficiency of service of the opposite party as the complainant is a Consumer as per decision of Jarkhand State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Ranchi in Archana shaw Vs Bargal Poor Tilak Munji University and other reported in 2003 (3) CPR 296 and the decision of Maharastra, State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Mumbai in the Manager, Study Circle Career Development Institute Vs Syed Juvameer Usman and other reported in 2003 (3) CPR Pg 241.
- The other decisions relied by the complainant are of High Court of A.P between Vighana Educational Foundation, Bangalore Vs NTR University of Health Sciences and another reported in 2003 (2) ALD Pg 340, where in it was held that admission of students to the professional Colleges, and all students have pay fee and other charges uniformly, and the other decision is of Supreme Court between J.J Merchant Vs Shrinath Chaturvedi reported in 2003 SAR (Civil) Pg 747, where in it was held that Consumers Forum is an alternative Forum established under the Act to discharge the function of a Civil Court and the main object is to provide speedy and simple Redressal to Consumer disputes. Hence in the light of the above decisions and discussions the complainant is certainly remaining entitled for the reliefs sought in the complaint.
- Therefore in the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite party to refund the advance tuition fee of Rs.74, 350/- and registration fee of Rs.1, 000/- to the complainant, with 9% interest from the date of the complaint till realization as compensation for damage for mental agony suffered by the complainant at the deficient conduct of the opposite party in not refunding the advance tuition fee, along with Rs.1,000/- as cost of the complaint within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Stenographer, Typed to the Dictation corrected by us, Pronounced in the Open Court this the 12th day of August, 2004.
PRESIDENT
MEMBER MEMBER
