By Sri. Jose. V. Thannikode, President:-
The complaint filed against the Opposite party to get back his tution fees and cost and compensation due to the deficiency of service from the side of Opposite Party.
2. Brief of the complaint:- The Complainant joined in Opposite party's institution for hardware and Networking class in the after noon batch. On 24.07.2013 and paid the fee of Rs.4,000/- on that day itself. He further stated that he join in the afternoon batch because he had to got for tution in the morning and he use to attend the class for two week. Thereafter the class teacher told him that hereafter your class will be in the morning batch but the Complainant stated his inability to attend the class in the morning session, and requested to do the needfull. Then the class teacher told that the fee can be refunded after consultation with the Principal and advised him to discontinue the class. On a repeated enquiry the School authorities finally told that the fee cannot be refunded. Hence the Complainant filed the complaint to get back his remitted fees and cost and compensation .
3. Notice were served to Opposite Party on 19.11.2013 and Opposite Party entered appearance and filed version on 20.01.2014 denying that the Complainant is not a consumer as per Consumer Protection Act and further submitted that the Complainant was admit in the afternoon batch and at the time of admission the Complainant has been intimated that after completion of the course in the morning batch the time of the afternoon batch will be changed to morning and further submitted that the Complainant also admitted in the application itself that the course fee once remitted by him will not be claimed on any account and further stating that the Complainant has joined in the course fully knowing that afternoon batch will be changed to morning batch and also submitted that the Complainant will be given one more chance during the next admission to complete the course and stated there fore no deficiency of service from the side of Opposite Party and stated that the Complainant is not entitled to get refund of the amount and prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost to this Opposite party.
4. On analying the complaint, version and documents the Forum raised the following points for considerations.
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of Opposite Party?
2. Relief and costs.
5. Point No.1:- In addition to the Complaint complainant filed proof affidavit and stated as stated in the complaint and he is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 marked. Ext.A1 is the receipt for Rs.4,000/- issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant. Opposite Party filed proof affidavit and in addition to the version. The Opposite Party stated that the complainant has will fully absented from the class from 16.08.2013 even in the afternoon session he has absented from class and also stated that the Complainant has not submitted any application for the return of fees to the Principal or the Manager. Ext.B1 and B2 is marked from the side of Opposite Parties. Ext.B1 is the application form of the Complainant. There in it can be seen that his class in 2nd Batch and in version and Opposite Party's affidavit it is admitted that he got admitted to afternoon batch. If the class time is ought to change it ought to have been written in the Ext.B1.
6. In Ext.B1 it is also stated that “the course fee once remitted by me will not be claimed on any account”. It will not help the Opposite Party when there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Ext.B2 is attendance register, wherein the shortage of attendance of Complainant can be seen. It is up to the Complainant whether he should attend the class regularly or not. In the above circumstances we find that without the consent of student changing the time of class and this stage not refunding the tution fee is a deficiency of service. So point No.1 is found found in favour of Complainant.
7. Point No.2:- Since the point No. 1 is in favour of the Complainant the Complainant is entitled for cost and compensation. The point No.2 is found accordingly.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and Opposite Party is directed to return back the fee of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand) only which is collected from the Complainant with 12% interest and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only as compensation and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand) only as cost of this proceedings. The order must be complied by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to CA transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum on this the 26th day of November 2014.
Date of filing:23.10.2013.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
/True copy
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Syam Das Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
OPW1. Parvathy Bhaskar Head of Section (Electronics),
Government Polytechnic, Meenangadi.
Exhibit for the complainant:
A1. Receipt. dt:24.07.2013.
Exhibits for the opposite Party.
B1. Application Form. dt:08.07.2013.
B2. Copy of Attendance Register (August 2013 to October 2013)
