Dr. Ram Gopal has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 requiring the opposite party to pay amount of Rs.68,250/- to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of Rs.2% per month till its realization and to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of harassment besides Rs.5500/- as litigation expenses. <br /> 2. The complainant averred in his complaint that he got her adopted daughter Manpreet kaur being guardian and adoptive father in the college of the opposite party in B.Sc. 1st year Bio-Technology on 14th June, 2006. The opposite party charged annual tuition fee for the whole year in lump sum from the daughter of the complainant on 14/6/2006 vide receipt No. 481 dated 14/6/2006 amounting to Rs.11,250/-. The opposite party has charged Rs.15,000/- from the daughter of the complainant as hostel charges vide receipt No. B.Sc. 1 dated 14/6/2006 against the rules of the opposite party as no dates for the payment of hostel charges has been notified by the college of opposite party. No hostel has been allotted to the daughter of the complainant so far till date. So the complainant is entitled for the refund of the same. The complainant made a telephone message to the opposite party on 27/6/2006 for the refund of the amounts of Rs.11,250/- and for refund of the amount of Rs.15,000/- which has been charged by the opposite party against their own rules and the opposite party asked him to come to the office of opposite party for collecting the refund of 75% of the aforesaid amount on 28/6/2006 but when the complainant reached then the opposite party refused to make payment and the complainant suffer damages of Rs.42,000/- on account of car expenses, mental and physical harassment and wastage of time with interest at the rate of 2% per month from 28/6/2006 till the realization of the amount. The complainant sent a registered notice to the opposite party through Sh. Lakhbinder Singh Advocate on 29/6/2006 and the opposite party gave reply but they failed to make the payment. After that they flatly refused to make the payment of the aforesaid amount in question. Hence this complaint. <br /> 3. The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 24-8-2006 complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties. <br /> 4. On receipt of the notice the opposite party appeared through Sh. B.D. Kumar Advocate and filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable on account of jurisdiction. No cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Forum as neither the opposite party resides nor has any office/branch of works for gain in the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Forum. No part of any cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The B.Sc. Biotechnology course is an integrated course for 3 years. There are limited number of seats sanctioned by the University to each institution running this course, so each and every seat of this course is very valuable and integrated for a period of 3 years. A candidate who once gets admission in the B.Sc. Biotechnology blocks the opportunity for so many candidates in the waiting list not only for that particular year i.e. Part-1 but also for the subsequent two years. Thus a student who once take admission in Part-1 of the course practically blocks that seat for all the three years as there is no provisions for lateral entry. It is correct that the college dues have to be paid in 3 installments but Rs.11250/- has been charged for fee of May to August. It is wrong that lump sum amount for the whole year was charged from the daughter of the complainant. The above said rules are mentioned in the prospectus of 2006-07 of the opposite party. The hostel fee Rs.15,000/- has to be given fully at the start of the session. Even hostel room No. 124 was allotted to the daughter of the complainant. It is wrong that every any commitment of refund of 75% of any amount was ever made. When the complainant approach the opposite party to get the refund of the amount the complainant was explained the procedure of seeking refund and the amount of refund that could be made. The daughter of the complainant submitted her application dated 24/7/2006 for leaving the college and hostel and gave the undertaking that the fee remitted by her is not refundable. The daughter of the complainant was taken away by the complainant without ever informing the opposite party. The claim of any damages by the complainant is untenable and illegal rather the opposite party is entitled for Rs.65000/- for damages. The opposite party explain the proper procedure and every rule alongwith the maximum refund that could have been made to the complainant. So the complaint be dismissed with costs. <br /> 5. Both the parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, fee receipt Ex.C-2, fee receipt Ex.C-3, legal notice Ex.C-4, postal receipt Ex.C-5, letter reference No. 697/868 dated 11/7/2006 Ex.C-6 and closed his evidence. <br /> 6. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant the opposite party tendered in their evidence affidavit of P.P. Sharma Principal Hans Raj Mahila Maha Vidayala, Jallandhar Ex.R-1, copy of prospect Ex.R-2, copy of allotment of hostel room Ex.R-3, copy of reply of notice Ex.R-4, copy of postal receipt Ex.R-5, copy of withdrawal form Ex.R-6 and closed their evidence. <br /> 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file. Our observations and findings are as under.<br /> 8. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that Manpreet Kaur daughter of the complainant after payment of the amount of Rs.11250/- as tuition fee and Rs.15,000/- hostel charges have not attended the classes in the college of the opposite party. Despite giving legal notice the opposite party have not refunded above noted amounts. The complainant also have suffered a lot mentally and physically, so the complainant is entitled to refund the above noted amounts alongwith sufficient amount of compensation. <br /> 9. Learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that amount in question is non refundable. Complainant have blocked once precious seat of a student for about three years which caused heavy loss to the opposite party. <br /> 10. Learned counsel for the opposite party has submitted that the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridkot have no jurisdiction to try and decide this complaint. <br /> 11. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the payment was made from Faridkot to the opposite party. There also had been a letter correspondence from Faridkot with the opposite party so this Forum has jurisdiction to try and decide this complaint. <br /> 12. From the perusal of the file it is made out that complainant admittedly have make payment of Rs.11250/- on 14/6/2006 with the opposite party vide receipt Ex.C-2 as fees for the month of May to August 2006. As per receipt Ex.C-3 a sum of Rs.15,000/- has been paid by the complainant to the opposite party as hostel fee for her admission in Biotechnology B.Sc. Part-1. She was allotted roll number 9441. <br /> 13. The opposite parties have not placed on the file if the student have been imparted any studies. It is also not on the file if Manpreet Kaur have occupied the hostel of the opposite party. The opposite party could produce attendance registers and record from the hostel occupancy register. They have not done so. Thus it can be safely said as per legal notice Ex.C-4 dated 29/6/2006 served by the complainant to the opposite parties that the student have not attended classes. She also have not occupied the hostel room. As per this notice no hostel has been allotted to Manpreet Kaur. The complainant had been representing the opposite party for refund of the deposits but they have not made the same. <br /> 14. The opposite party has submitted reply to the notice dated 29/6/2006 of the complainant on 11/7/2006. As per this reply they have not received any information from the student whether she does not want to continue studies in the college of the opposite party. They have requested complainant to follow the requisite procedure for withdrawal from the college. In this reply the opposite party have not taken plea if the entire amount is non refundable. The prospectus Ex.R-2 does not make specific mention about refundable and non refundable amounts. Though there is allocation of the hostel to the daughter of the complainant vide entry Ex.R-3 but there is no date of occupying hostel by Manpreet Kaur. <br /> 15. On asking by the opposite party the complainant have filled up application form for withdrawal from the college on 24/7/2006 but entire amount has been made non refundable in this application Ex.R-4 by the opposite party. When the student have not been imparted studies by the opposite party then as per Sushant Yuvaraj Rode Versus Shir Ramdeobaba Engineering College and another reported in Consumer Law Today-132 1994(2) the student is a consumer of services of educational institution after deposit of admission fee, he is entitled to refund of fee if no services are rendered by the educational institution. <br /> 16. As per Sunita Garg Versus Ghaziabad Development Authority reported in 1993(2) Consumer Law Today-180, the cause of action arises from where the amounts are deposited with the institution. The complainant have served legal notice Ex.C-4 from Faridkot. Reply Ex.C-6 has been received by the complainant from the opposite party at Faridkot. Complainant is the resident of Faridkot. So the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridkot have to try and decide this complaint. The opposite party being a big institution have effectively contested this case at Faridkot. So the application dated 17/4/2007 of the opposite party to dismiss the present complaint being barred by territorial jurisdiction is also dismissed. <br /> 17. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the complaint is accepted. Accordingly the opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.11,250/- charged as tuition fee, Rs.15,000/- charged as hostel charges and also pay Rs.1750/- as compensation for mental tension and harassment, in total Rs.28,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the opposite party shall pay interest on the amount of Rs.28,000/- at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the decision of the complaint till the realization of the amount. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room. <br /> Announced in open Forum:<br /> Dated: 3/10/2007