DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT
C.C. No. : 86 of 2018
Date of Institution : 21.05.2018
Date of Decision : 12.06.2019
Parveen Rani aged about 30 years d/o Amarjit Lal r/o Near Octroi Post No. 5, Katcha Pakhi Road, Ferozepur Road, Faridkot.
.....Complainant
Versus
- The Registrar, Karnataka State Open University, Manasagangothri, Mysore-570 006.
- Red Cross Centre, Sadiq Chowk, Faridkot through its Secretary.
- Jatinder Chawla c/o Digital Computer Machines, CAL-C Computer Education Centre, Behind Narinder Cinema, above Post Office, Kotkapura, Tehsil Kotkapura.
.........OPs
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Quorum: Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,
Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member,
Present: Sh Mandeep Dhingra, Ld Counsel for complainant,
Sh Ashu Mittal, Ld Counsel for OP-2,
Sh Charanjit Sidana, Ld Counsel for OP-3,
OP-1 Exparte.
ORDER
(Ajit Aggarwal, President)
cc no.-86 of 2018
Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs for deficiency in service and for seeking directions to OPs to hand over original degree of B Sc I.T. and for further directing OPs to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- for inconvenience, harassment and mental agony suffered by complainants besides litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.
2 Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant passed her B Sc I T from Karnatka State Open University through OP-2 and her exams were got conducted by OP-3 in year 2013. Detail Marks Card was also provided to her by OP-3 and she was declared pass with good marks. It is submitted that original degree of complainant has not been released and it is still lying with OP-1. It is further submitted that complainant got admission through OP-2 by depositing requisite fees in Red Cross Centre and other classes and examinations thereof took place at the centre of OP-3. Ld counsel for complainant submitted that complainant is a handicapped person and despite repeated requests she has not received her original degree for passing out B Sc I T and due to this, she has to loss her job. Act of OPs in not providing original degree to complainant for clearing her B Sc. I.T. examination, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on their part. Complainant has prayed for accepting the complaint alongwith compensation for harassment and litigation expenses. Hence, the complaint.
cc no.-86 of 2018
3 Ld Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 29.05.2018, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.
4 On receipt of the notice, OP-2 filed reply wherein they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that present complaint is not maintainable against them and complainant is not their consumer. This Forum has no jurisdiction to hear and try the present complaint and she has concealed the material facts from this Forum as complainant has done only diploma in Computer Application for one year from 1.05.2017 to 1.04.2018 from their institution and thereafter, she did not take admission in any course. Moreover, answering OP has no affiliation with any University to get done B.Sc. I.T and they have not got deposited any fees from complainant. All the other allegations are denied being wrong and incorrect and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
5 OP-3 also filed written statement taking preliminary objections that complainant has filed a false complaint and have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that complainant has never been their student, rather she was the student of OP-2. She never took admission in their centre and even her exams were conducted at J N Model School, Kotkapura. It is averred that being handicapped, complainant was unable to move to Red Cross Society, Faridkot daily to complete her study, therefore, answering OP only helped
cc no.-86 of 2018
her and never demanded any frees from her, but she has falsely impleaded them in present litigation. Op-3 helped complainant in filing application under RTI and in reply to their applications, OP-1 gave reply that due to several writ petitions pending before Madras High Court, original degree of complainant cannot be issued and complainant was fully aware of this fact and has intentionally filed this complaint to harass them. They also helped complainant to get her DMC of B Sc by filling fees to , which was deposited by OP-3. However, on merits OP-3 have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is no deficiency in service on their part and complainant is not entitled for any relief or compensation as sought by her. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on their part and refuted all the allegations of complainant being false and frivolous and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
6 Notice issued to OP-1 through registered cover did not receive back undelivered. It was presumed to be served. Despite expiry of statutory period, no body appeared on behalf of OP-1 either in person or through counsel to contest the allegations of complainant on date fixed, therefore, vide order dated 24.07.2018, OP-1 was proceeded against exparte.
7 Parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-3 and then, closed the evidence.
cc no.-86 of 2018
8 In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Counsel for OP-2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Sushil Kumar Bhatnagar Ex. OP-2/1 and document Ex OP-2/2 and then, closed the evidence. Counsel for OP-3 tendered in evidence documents ExOP-3/1 to Op-3/15 and closed the same on behalf of OP-3.
9 We have heard learned counsel for parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits & documents placed on the file by complainant as well as opposite party no.2 and 3.
10 From the careful perusal of the complaint case and record placed on file by respective parties, it is observed that grievance of complainant is that she passed her B.Sc. I T degree from OP-1 through OP-2 and classes and exams were conducted at the centre of OP-3, but despite repeated requests, OPs have not issued her original degree for B Sc I T, due to which she is unable to do any job, which has caused her huge harassment and mental agony. In reply, OP-2 took plea that complainant has done only diploma in Computer Application for one year from 1.05.2017 to 1.04.2018 from their institution and thereafter, she did not take admission in any course and even OP-2 has no affiliation with any University to get done B.Sc. I.T and they have not got deposited any fees from complainant. All the other allegations of complainant are denied being wrong and incorrect. However, OP-3 admitted in their written statement that complainant passed out her B Sc IT from the OP-1 Karnatka State Open University, Mysore and brought before the Forum that she has completed her degree from OP-1 through OP-2 and she
cc no.-86 of 2018
was the student of OP-2. She never took admission in their centre and even her exams were conducted at J N Model School, Kotkapura. OP-3 helped complainant in filing application under RTI and in reply to their applications, OP-1 gave reply that due to several writ petitions pending before Madras High Court, original degree of complainant cannot be issued and complainant was fully aware of this fact, but she has intentionally filed this complainant to harass them. They also helped complainant to get her DMC of B Sc by filling fees , which was deposited by OP-3, but they never demanded any fees from complainant. There is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. There is no rebuttal from OP-1 as it was declared exparte. However, from the averments made by OP-3, it is clear that complainant took admission in the institute of OP-1 through OP-2 and pleadings of complainant that she has passed out her B Sc I T degree is clear from the Photostat copy of Statement of Marks attached by complainant with complaint. Version of OP-3 that they helped complainant in obtaining her degree is proved through documents Ex OP-3/2 to OP-3/13 which are copies of letter issued by complainant to OP-1 requesting them to release her original degree for passing out B Sc I T from their University. These documents clearly reveal the grievance of complainant that she passed out her graduation in Information Technology from OP-1 university and there is deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 in not releasing original degree to complainant, which has caused her huge harassment and mental agony. Grievance of complainant is truly proved in the light of documents placed on record by parties. Complainant has
cc no.-86 of 2018
produced sufficient and cogent evidence to prove her grievance and all documents placed on record are authentic and are beyond any doubt.
11 In the light of above discussion, complaint in hand is hereby allowed against OP-1 as there is deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 in not releasing original degree of B. Sc. I.T. to complainant. OP-1 is directed to release original B. Sc. I. T. Degree of complainant and is further directed to pay Rs.3,000/-to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides Rs.2,000/-as litigation expenses. Compliance of this order be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainants shall be entitled to proceed under section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. There seems to be no deficiency in service on the part of OP-2 and OP-3 as they have to play no role in fetching degree to complainant, therefore, complaint against them stands hereby dismissed. Copy of the order be issued to parties. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in open Forum:
Dated: 12.06.2019
(Param Pal Kaur) (Ajit Aggarwal)
Member President
