By. Sri. Chandran Alachery, Member:
The complaint is filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 for an Order directing the opposite parties to return a sum of Rs.41,000/- towards fees collected for the BBM course, to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards additional amount spent by the complainant in connection with admission and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony and to the cost of the proceedings.
2. The complainant's case in brief as follows:- The complainant approached the 1st opposite party having his office at Mananthavady named “Global Education Guidance Trust” for admission for BBM in the institute of 2nd opposite party for his daughter. The 1st opposite party has collected Rs.66,000/- as an advance amount for admission from the complainant. At the time of collecting the amount, the 1st opposite party promised to return back the money if the complainant is not satisfied the institution and atmosphere. Thereafter, the 1st opposite party has taken the complainant to the 2nd opposite party at Banglore and admitted his daughter there. The complainant's daughter attended one day class and stayed in Hostel for one day. The atmosphere in the hostel is totally unsecured and she could not sleep one day night. The complainant narrated the difficulties to 1st opposite party but no solution suggested and asked the daughter of the complainant to leave the institution. The 1st opposite party already assured to give back the entire advance amount of Rs.66,000/- to the complainant. On believing the words, the complainant's daughter discontinued the course and came back. Thereafter the 2nd opposite party sent a cheque for Rs.25,000/- bearing No.372760 dated 01.01.2013 with a covering letter stating that they are refunding the entire hostel fee. The 2nd opposite party did not return the balance amount of Rs.41,000/-. The complainant had to spent Rs.20,000/- additional for the travel expenses and other sundry expenses. Aggrieved by this, the complainant filed this complaint for the redressal of grievances.
3. On receipt of complaint, Notices were issued to the opposite parties and the opposite parties appeared before the Forum and filed version. In the version the opposite party No.1 contented that the complainant never approached the opposite party No.1 for admission for BBA course for his daughter Jayalakshmi and the opposite party No.1 contents that the opposite party No.1 never collected a sum of Rs.66,000/- as advance from the complainant. The opposite party No.1 states that the opposite party No.1 do not know anything about the admission and discontinuation of the course and the repayment done by the opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.2 filed version and contented that the complainant had approached the opposite party No.2 through the opposite party No.1 for the purpose of admission to BBM course. The opposite party No.2 also contents that the opposite party No.2 do not know whatever the transaction took place between the opposite party No.1 and the complainant. The opposite party No.2 challenges the jurisdiction of this Forum also.
4. On going through the complaint, versions of opposite parties and documents, the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Point No.1:- In addition to complaint, the complainant filed proof affidavit and examined as PW1 and documents are marked as Ext.A1 and Ext.A2. Ext.A1 is the photocopy of Cheque issued by opposite party No.2 to the complainant for the refund of Rs.25,000/- and Ext.A2 is the covering letter of opposite party No.2 in refunding the Hostel fees of Rs.25,000/-. Opposite party No.1 not adduced oral evidence but only cross-examined the complainant. The opposite party No.2 not appeared after filing of version and not adduced any evidence. Opposite party No.2 is set Ex-parte on 09.06.2014. In the cross-examination of complainant by the opposite party No.1, nothing is brought out against the complainant. Here the specific case of complainant is that the complainant approached opposite party No.1 for admission for BBA course who is conducting an office named “Global Education Guidelance Trust” and opposite party No.1 promised admission in BBA Course at the institution conducted by opposite party No.2 at Banglore. Thereafter the complainant gave Rs.66,000/- in advance to opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 took the complainant to Banglore and paid admission Fees there. The opposite party No.2 admitted that the complainant approached the opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1. But opposite party No.1 denied the entire allegation of the complainant. In the circumstances of admission of opposite party No.2 that the complainant approached the opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1, the contentions of opposite party No.1 will never lie. The Forum found that the contentions taken by the opposite party No.1 is absolutely false and misleading. The involvement of opposite party No.1 is well proved and there is nothing to disbelieve the case of the complainant. The opposite party No.2 refunded Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as Hostel Fees collected by them and did not pay the balance amount. As per a document produced by opposite party No.2 ie the photocopy of application form filled by the complainant's daughter Jayalakshmi, it is noted that the Hostel Fees is Rs.25,000/-, Tuition Fees is Rs.16,000/- and Application Form Fees is Rs.700/- is accepted by opposite party No.2 for admission. Even if that document is not marked due to the absence of opposite party No.2 in the Forum for evidence, the Forum relied on in that document for considering the Fees collected by opposite party No.2. Out of the total Fees collected by opposite party No.2, opposite party No.2 returned Rs.25,000/-. The balance amount to be returned is Rs.16,000/- as tuition fees collected by them. If the complainant demanded the repayment of Fees collected by opposite party No.2 after the closing of admission at the institution of opposite party No.2, the complainant is not entitled to get the refund as per the ruling cited in the CPR 2004 April, State Commission, Uttarakhand page 52. But here opposite party No.2 did not produce any such evidences before the Forum. The opposite party No.1 blindly denied the entire things. Out of Rs.41,000/-, after deducting Rs.16,000/-, the balance amount will be Rs.25,000/-. The application Form charge is Rs.700/-. After deducting Rs.700/- the balance amount collected by opposite party No.1 is Rs.24,300/- and that amount is to be returned to the complainant. Therefore the complainant is entitled to get the balance amount after deducting Rs.25,000/- from the total payment of Rs.66,000/-. The balance amount will be Rs.41,000/-. There is evidence before the Forum that the opposite party No.2 accepted Rs.25,000/- towards Hostel Fees and Rs.16,000/- towards Tuition Fees. The Hostel Fees is already returned by opposite party No.2. So the Forum found that there is deficiency of service from the part of oppposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 in dealing the matter. The opposite party No.2 have to return the tuition fees also. Point No.1 is found accordingly.
6. Point No.2:- Since Point No.1 is found in favour of complainant, the complainant is entitled to get the cost and compensation.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party No.1 is directed to pay Rs.24,300/- (Rupees Twenty Four Thousand and Three Hundred only) to the complainant, since the opposite party No.1's contentions are found absolutely false and misleading, the Forum, award a penalty upon him by directing the opposite party No.1 to pay the entire cost and compensation to the complainant. Therefore, the opposite party No.1 is also directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) as cost of the proceedings and Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) as compensation to the complainant. The opposite party No.2 is directed to pay Rs,16,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Thousand Only) to the complainant being the tuition fees collected by opposite party No.2 from the complainant. The opposite party No.1 and 2 are directed to pay the above amounts within one month from the date of the receipt of this Order, failing which the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest for the whole sum thereafter.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 29th day of August 2014.
Date of Filing:29.07.2013.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
APPENDIX.
Witness for the complainant:
PW1. Raveendran. C. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:
Nil.
Exhibits for the complainant:
A1. Copy of Cheque. Dt:01.01.2013.
A2. Covering Letter. Dt:09.01.2013.
Exhibits for the opposite Parties.
Nil.
Sd/-
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
