BEFORE THE SOUTH MUMBAI  DISTRICT  CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

 O.No.

Complaint No.SMF/MUM/CC/2016/66

   Date of filing :  17/03/2016                                                                                                     

                                                         Date of Order:  27/09/2017

1.Harish Doshi,

 467, Husain Bhai Mansion, 1^st Floor,

 Room No.4, Maulana Azaad Road,

Near Gol Deval,

Mumbai -  400 003.                                          ….. Complainant.    

  V/s.

The Scholar High School,

13, Henry Rd.,

 Apollo Reclamation,

Colaba,

Mumbai – 400 039,

Janta Store,

Gala  House, Lala Nigam Road,

Apollo Bandar, Near Strand Cinema,

Colaba, Mumbai,

Maharashtra – 4000 005.                       …..Opponents/ Opposite Party

                    Coram:

Shri. G.K. Rathod              :   Hon’ble President

Shri. S.R. Sanap                  :   Hon’ble Member

Appearance:  Complainant                   –       In person  

                       For Opponent No. 1        -        Joy Legal Consultants

                       Opponent No. 2      -        Adv. Smt. Bindu Jain

// J U D G M E N T //

PER SHRI. G.K. RATHOD – HON’BLE  PRESIDENT

                   The brief facts of the complaint is that his son is taking an admission in Opponent No. 1’s School.  The Opponent No. 1 mentally harassed to the son of the Complainant by making all the events organized by the School compulsory and extracting money in the name of education.  It is alleged that the Opponent No. 1 asked to pay sum of Rs. 2,550/- in the name of Note Books and stationery and the said amount is paid in cash as demanded by the Opponent No.1.  He has made several correspondence with the Opponent No. 1 but the Opponent No. 1 has not given response to the Complainant’s letter.  The Complainant’s son was insulted by the Opponent No. 1. He has made a grievance before the Education Head of Maharashtra and the concerned Officer has assured that they will look into the matter.  It is further contended that pertaining to the Note Books etc., purchased from the Opponent No.2, the Opponent No. 1 extracting money from the Complainant and other parents.  The Opponent No. 1 asked to buy two annual day tickets forcefully and therefore, there is a deficiency in service on the part of the Opponent Nos. 1 and 2 and has claimed  amount of Rs. 14,300/- paid by him to the Opponent No. 1 and compensation of Rs. 9,00,000/-  for causing threatening, abusing, harassment, mental agony, terrorizing his son  and cost of Rs. 15,000/- for filing this case with interest @12% on total amount of Rs. 9,29,300/-  till the date of realization of the claims.

(2)              To rebut the allegations, the Opponent No. 1 has filed written statement and denied all the allegations leveled by the Complainant against him. It is further submitted that complaint is false, frivolous and only blackmailing the Opponent No. 1, extracting money from the Opponent No.1.  The Complainant is not a “Consumer” of Opposite Party no.1 and therefore, this Forum has no jurisdiction to pass any order.  It is further submitted that the Opponent No. 1 is an ICSE Affiliated School and the school Note Books are printed with the Opponent No.2 to maintain uniformity, standard and quality of the Opponent No. 1. The Opponent No. 2 has designed the Note  Books for the Opponent No. 1 since 2002 and the Opponent No. 1 has authorized the Opponent No.2 for printing of the stationery.  As per the Circular dtd. 3/2/2016, the parents of the Opposite Party No. 1 issued  cheques in favour of the Opponent No.2  and it is further submitted that all the fees collected by the Opponent No.1 goes to the PTA Account and therefore, there is no question to harass the Complainant and his son.  It s further submitted that there is no cause of action against the Opponent No. 1 and the complaint is not maintainable hence liable for dismissed. 

(3)              The Opponent No. 2 has submitted his written statement and denied all the allegations alleged against him. It is further submitted that in the present complaint, the Opponent is not a “Consumer” of the Complainant.  The Complainant has not paid anything directly to the Opponent No.2. It has no concern with the Complainant and therefore, the complaint is not tenable against him.  Only to harass and extract money from the Opponent No.2,  the Complainant has made a party.

(4)              From the following facts and circumstances, the  following points arouse for our  determination.

Reasoning :- 

(5)              Considering the contents of the parties, documents placed on the record, affidavit evidence, written arguments and oral arguments and case laws cited by the Opponent No. 1, it appears that the Complainant’s son is taking education in the School of the Opponent No.1.  The Complainant has made the allegations against the Opponent Nos. 1 and 2 that they have harassing and abusing, insulting and demanded additional fees and other fees for other activities.  On the contrary, the Opponent No. 1 has submitted whatever fees collected from the student goes to the PTA Account and the same account is maintained by PTA itself. As per the contents of the complaint, he has also approached to the Education Officer against the Opponents. The Education Officer has given the assurance that he will look into the matter.  Infact, the subject matter of the complaint, is related with the Education Department and there is a separate hierarchy to make a grievance against the Education Institute. Therefore, we found the substance in the submission of the Opponent Nos. 1 & 2 that this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the matter. It is pertinent to note that there is no sufficient evidence to show that  there is a deficiency in service on the part of the Opponent No.1 or unfair trade practice. It is also clear that there is no direct contract between the Complainant and the Opponent No. 2, on that part also it is not appeared that there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the Opponent N0.2.

(6)              Considering the above facts and circumstances, we found that this Forum has no jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed in the  complaint  by the Complainant against the Opponents Nos. 1 and 2.     Accordingly, we answered the point Nos. 1 and 2 in negative.                      

(7)              Hence the following order :

//O R D E R//

1. The complaint stands dismissed.

    

2. Parties to bear their own costs.

    

3. Certified copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.

    

       sd/-xxx                                                                        sd/-xxx

 (Shri. S.R. Sanap)                                       (Shri.G.K. Rathod)

  Hon’ble  Member                                       Hon’ble President

Note:-  As the pleadings, affidavit, documents, written arguments of the parties are in English, the order in the proceeding is passed for the better knowledge of the parties in English.

vns