This complaint  having come up for final hearing before us on  30.10.2014  on perusal of the material records  and on hearing the  arguments of  Thiru. S.Martin, the counsel  for the complainant and Thiru.R.Perumal, the counsel for the opposite parties but subsequently remaining  set exparte  and having stood  before us for consideration, till this day the Forum  passed the following

By President, Thiru..K.Anbazhagan, B.A.B.L., 

                       This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection

Act 1986.                    

2) The brief facts of the case of the complainant: -

The minor complainant represented by hisfather filedthis complaint for refund of fees paid by him with the opposite party.The minorcomplainantgot admissionwith the 2^nd opposite party in B.Tech course on 19.06.2009.The 2^nd opposite partycollege isaffiliatedto thefirst opposite party namely Sastra University, Thanjavur.At the time of admission, the complainantwasrequired to pay a sum of Rs. 42,000/- + 10,000/- + 11,000/- + 5000 = Rs.68,000/- and the same was paidby the complainant for which receiptswere issued by the second opposite party andthereafter the minor complainanthad got a seat in the counselling under the Government College forBDS Course.Immediately the complainanthave approachedwith the opposite party to get back the original certificates and also for issuance of transfer certificateand for refund of amountRs. 68,000/- already paid.But the second opposite party have insistedand compelled to pay full term course fees of a sum of Rs. 2,48,000/-, otherwisethey will not issue transfer certificate to the complainant.The transfer certificate is very much essential to join the BDS course without any alternative that the complainanthas paid a sum of Rs. 2,48,000/- on14.09.2009for whichreceipts has been issued by the 2^nd opposite party.After receipts of above said payment that the second opposite party issued transfer certificate and they have utilized urgencyand received the above said amount under duress from the complainant.Collecting of such a huge amount and non refund of the amount received from the complainant earlier is clearly an unfair trade practice and there is great deficiency in service on the opposite parties.The complainant has borrowed money from3^rd party on high rateof interest. Hence the complainantsought for relieffor the refundof Rs.3,00,000/-with interest at the rate of 18 Percentage per annumanddirect to pay the compensationof Rs. 1,00,000/- and costof this complaint.

The complainant wasadmitted in B.Techprogramme in Bio metric branch through meritbased on19.06.2009 and discontinued course on 14.09.2009 after attending the classesfrom 02.07.2009 andhe attended 1^st CAA Examination and thereby by causinga vacancyin the institutionwhich cannot be filled asadmissions wereclosed even on 31.07.2009.As per clause 4 of theGeneral instructionsalong withthe printedin theapplication form shows that there cannot be any refund of fees.The complainant and his father had given a declaration and signed the application in an unambiguousterms and contrary to the complaint was requestedto pay a sum of Rs.2,48,000/- the entire course fees as agreedand they havevoluntarilypaid the said amount on 14.09.209 andthey received backtheir allcertificates. The complainant issued a legal notice for which the opposite party have also issued a suitable reply.There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.The complainant is not entitled any relief as claimed in the petition.These opposite parties have not violated any rules and regulations and policy of the Government as the university is having own rules for administration.The University is open and no secrecy is maintained in respect of admissions and imparting education.This complaint is without any cause of action, and it is instituted at the instance of mischief maker or persons who are enimical to university.

4) After receipt of summon from this Forum, the opposite parties have engaged their own Advocateand took time forfiling written version. The case was posted for filing of proof affidavit by the opposite parties and it is pending for more than 2 years.Hence the opposite parties were set exparte on 08.10.2014, andthere after the complainant has filed proof affidavit and markeddocuments Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.8. However, though the opposite partieshave not filed proof affidavit and writtenarguments but on the basis of written version filed by the opposite party the complaint have been disposed on merits.

5) The pointsfor determination in this case are:

                        1) Whether  there is  any deficiency in service  as alleged by the complainant

                            as against  the  opposite party?

                        2)  To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

                    6)  The complainant has filed proof affidavit with documents, which are marked as Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.8. 

                     7) POINTS 1 & 2:   I have carefully scrutinized of the pleadings of the both  parties, the complainant  filed this complaint for refund of Rs.3,00,000/- which was paid  by him towards tuition fees and for  other consequences of relief.  Admittedly, the complainant was admitted  in B.Tech course in the opposite party college  on 19.06.2009 and he  discontinue the first year course on 14.09.2009 .  He attended the class from 02.07.2009 and further attended  first CIA  examination . According to the complainant that he has got a BDS seat under Government reservation quota and hence approached the opposite party for return of  certificates  and also  for refund of amount already paid  towards tuition fees.  But according to the opposite parties that the admission for the first year programme of B.Tech course closed even on 31.07.2009  and any vacancy arising  thereafter cannot be filled up and the seat will be kept vacant because of the complainant’s option  to join BDS Course.  The opposite party further contended in the written version that clause 4 of the General instructions  attached with the application form reveals that there is no question of refund of fees collected by the opposite party and such student has to pay the remaining course fees also and hence that the complainant  has voluntarily paid the entire course fees of Rs.2,48,000/- for which the receipt was issued by the opposite party.

                   8) On the side of the complainant Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.8 were marked.  Ex.A.1 is xerox copy  of the transfer certificate issued by the opposite party.  On going to the Ex.A.1 that the complainant left the institution  even on 12.09.2009 and the programme  was started on 02.07.2009 almost that the complainant has attended  classes 85 days.  Ex.A.2 is copy of legal  notice issued  by the Advocate for the complainant dated 14.10.2009 by which the complainant has demanded repayment  of  Rs. 3,16,000/- with interest  at the rate of 18 Percentage per annum  and for Rs.1,00,000/- towards damages etc., . Ex.A.3 is reply notice issued by the opposite party dated 23.10.2009. Ex.A.3 reveals the following defence.”That the opposite party  placed reliance  clause 4 of general instructions attached with the application form and hence  that the “ candidate  should pay the entire programme fee minus whatever has been already paid, if he/she discontinues  the programme any time after its commencement”.  The opposite  party  allowed the students  to  withdraw   from  the course up to 31^st July 2009 without payment of any extra fees.  That the complainant  has filed  withdrawal letter only on  14.09.2009 and therefore  the vacancy arises from withdrawn  of the course by the complainant will  remain vacant for remaining 7 semesters.  Hence the  university  insisted for payment of Rs.2,48,000/- and the same was paid by the complainant.

                      9)  Ex.A.4 is  fee receipt dated 19.06.2009 issued by the opposite party at the time of  admission for a sum of Rs. 42,000/-.  The tuition fee mentioned as Rs.35,000/- for the first semester of the B.Tech course.  Ex.A.5  shows payment of Rs.10,000/- 0n 19.6.2009 towards  development charges.  Ex.A.6is  dated 14.09.2009 fee receipt issued by the opposite party for the payment of Rs.2,48,000/- for the remaining  7 semesters.  Ex.A.7 and Ex.A.8 is acknowledgement card. 

                 10) Now the  important point to be decided is whether the complainant is entitled  to get back the amount paid under Ex.A.6.  On considering  the entire facts as stated above that the complainant left the college even before  closing of the first semester for which he has paid  first term fees with other fees under Ex.A.4, as  already stated that the complainant has attended the class  for about 85 days, but the first semester is six months.

                   11)  That the University  has not filed any rules and regulations for the collection of tuition fees for the remaining 7 semesters.  It is not justifiable claim to pay the remaining  7 semesters tuition fees by the opposite parties.  Therefore this Forum is of the view  that there is unfair trade practice  in the name of  education by the  opposite  party and there is deficiency in service. 

                     12) That the complainant  is entitled to get back  the amount  paid under receipt Ex.A.6 Rs.2,48,000/- which was  paid by the complainant  under compulsion  by the opposite party while issuing  transfer certificate which is very much necessary for admission into the BDS Course.

                   13)  In the  result, the complaint is  allowed.   The  opposite party  is  directed  to   pay a sum of Rs.2,48,000/-(Rupees two lakh forty eight  thousand only) towards tuition fees collected by the opposite party to the  complainant , and to pay a sum of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) towards  compensation for the mental agony suffered by  him  owing to the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, and Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand  only)  towards cost of his litigation within  30 days from the date of this order failing  which it shall carry interest at the rate of 18 Percentage per annum from the  date  of this order  till the date of its realization.

         This order was dictated by me to the Steno-Typist, transcribed by her and corrected and pronounced by me on this  06th   day of  November     2014.

MEMBER                                                                                                    PRESIDENT

List of documents on the side of the complainant:-

List of documents on the side of the Opposite parties :    NIL