DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

Civil Station, Palakkad – 678 001, Kerala

Dated this the 31^st day of October, 2009

Present: Smt.Seena.H, President

Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member

Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member

CC No.20/2008

J.Shefi ,

S/o.Jainulabdeen,

Sanam,

Haritha Nagar,

West Yakkara,

Palakkad. - Complainant

(By Adv.K.Sasidharan)

Vs

The Principal,

NPV Technical Centre,

BES Building,

Nurani,

Palakkad. - Opposite party

(By Adv.K.Kusalakumaran)

O R D E R

By Smt.Seena.H, President

Case of the complainant in brief:-

Complainant joined for Draughtsman Civil course in Phonetic Industrial Training Centre, the institution headed by the opposite party. In the advertisement of the said institution it is stated that the institution is recognized by the Govt. of Kerala and affiliated to NCVT, Govt. of India. According to the complainant many of the courses conducted in the said institution lacks Govt recognition. Believing the advertisement complainant joined the said institution on 14/11/2007. An amount of Rs.9100/- was paid as fees and commencement of the class was said to be in November. On the first day of attending the class itself complainant understood that class has been commenced 5 months ago. Complainant asked for refund of the fees already paid, for which opposite party was not amenable. At the time of return of the certificate, complainant's father was forced to sign on several papers. According to the complainant, the act of opposite party deliberately concealing the fact that the class has been commenced before the admission of the

complainant itself and non return of the fees already paid amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on his part.

2. Opposite party filed version contending the following. Opposite party runs an institution under the head 'Phonetic Engineering and Technical Institute'. The said institution is affiliated to NCVT, Govt. of India and is recognized by the Department of Technical Education, Govt. of Kerala. Along with the said institution opposite party also runs N.P.Venkidachala Iyer Industrial Training Centre which is also affiliated to NCVT, Govt of India and Kerala Govt recognized. Opposite party admits the fact that complainant joined Draughtsman/Civil-1 course in the opposite party institution on 14/11/2007 by paying an amount of Rs.9100/- as fees. Opposite party denies the say of the complainant that he has admitted the complainant stating class is yet to start. Opposite party has clearly stated that class has already begun and opposite party is ready to make arrangements to provide the classes already covered. Opposite party also denies the say of the complainant that he has attended the class only one day. After taking admission on 14/11/2007, complainant has attended the class upto 24/11/07. Complainant's father has voluntarily signed the paper in receipt of SSLC book and other certificates. Fees once paid will not be returned is clearly stated in the prospectus. Fees for the course complainant opted is Rs.10,700/-. Complainant has paid only Rs.9100/- and balance amount is due to the opposite party. Complainant was admitted to the opposite party institution on the basis of a circular dtd.23/10/07 issued by the Department of Industrial Training. Further opposite party has not received the legal notice dtd.19/12/07 and hence not replied. According to the opposite party, there is no deficiency in service on his part and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. Both parties filed affidavits. Exts.A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant and Exts.B1 to B12 marked on the side of opposite party.

4. Now the issues for consideration are;

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?

2. If so, what is the reliefs and costs?

5. Issues 1 & 2:

The specific case of the complainant is that the opposite party institution does not

have affiliation and recognition as advertised by them. Further opposite party admitted the

complainant for the course concealing the fact that it has been commenced much earlier and opposite party is not ready to refund the fees already paid. Opposite party denies the entire say of the complainant except the fact that complainant was admitted to his institution on 14/11/2007.

6. Heard both parties and perused the relevant documents on record. On going through Ext.B4 and B6 it is crystal clear that opposite party has got affiliation and is recognized by the Kerala Govt. Ext.B9 which is the letter issued by the complainant's father to the opposite party clearly shows the reasons for leaving the institution. Ext.B9 was signed under compulsion is not proved by the complainant. The reason stated for leaving the institution in the registered lawyer notice issued on behalf of the complainant is that opposite party failed to commence the classes on the promised date and when enquired opposite party assured that class will be started forthwith and requested the complainant to wait for some more days. A total contradictory version is stated in the complaint. The case set out in the complaint is that on the first day of the joining the class itself complainant understood that the class has been commenced 5 months ago and opposite party promised to take classes on portions already covered etc.

7. Going through the two contradictory versions of the complainant itself, we are of the view that complainant miserably failed to prove a case in his favour.

8. In the result, complaint dismissed. No order as to costs.

9. Pronounced in the open court on this the 31^st day of October, 2009.

Sd/-

Seena.H,

President

Sd/-

Preetha.G.Nair,

Member

Sd/-

Bhanumathi.A.K,

Member

Witness examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of opposite parties

Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1 – Receipt No.2385 dtd.14/11/07 for Rs.9100/- issued by opposite party to

complainant

Ext.A2 (Series) – Copy of lawyer notice dtd.19/12/07 sent by complainant to opposite party

along with postal receipt

Ext.A3 – Ackonwledgement card

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties

Ext.B1 – Prospectus for 2008-09 issued by Govt of Kerala

Ext.B2 - Prospectus for 2007-08 issued by Govt of Kerala

Ext.B3 – Training Calendar for 2006-07 issued by Govt of Kerala

Ext.B4 – Prospectus of NPV ITC

Ext.B5 – Prospectus of PHONETIC

Ext.B6 – True copy of Proceedings No.A3/886/2007/RDTEC dtd.09/07/07 issued from

Regional Directorate of Technical Education, Kozhikode.

Ext.B7 – True copy of Letter dtd.06/11/07 sent by Training Director to Principal, ITI/ITC

Ext.B8 – True copy of Receipt No.2385 dtd.14/11/07 for Rs.9100/- issued by opposite party

to complainant

Ext.B9 – Undertaking dtd.26/11/07 given by complainant's father to opposite party

Ext.B10 – Form of Application for Admission of complainant

Ext.B11 – True copy of letter No.C1/16328/07 dtd.23/10/07 sent by Training Director,

Department of Industrial Training to opposite party.

Ext.B12 – Copy of Lr. No.C2/3255/91(26) dtd.21/10/91 sent by the Director of Training,

Department of Industrial Training to opposite party

Forum's exhibit

Nil

Costs (Not Allowed)