Rajasthan

StateCommission

A/341/2018

Registrar Niims University - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vinod Kumar Sharma s/o Radhey Shyam Sharma - Opp.Party(s)

Aditya Mitruka

13 Nov 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1

 

FIRST APPEAL NO: 341/2018

 

Registrar, NIMS University, Shobha Nagar, Delhi Road, Jaipur & ors.

Vs.

Vinod Kumar Sharma s/o Radheyshtan Sharma r/o Plot No. C-705, Budh Vihar, Alwar. Raj.

 

 

Date of Order 13.11.2018

 

Before:

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Nisha Gupta- President

Hon'ble Mr.Kamal Kumar Bagri-Member

Hon'ble Mrs. Meena Mehta -Member

 

Mr. Aditya Mitruka counsel for the appellants

Mr. Manoj Jangid counsel for the respondent

 

BY THE STATE COMMISSION ( PER HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NISHA GUPTA,PRESIDENT):

2

 

This appeal is filed against the order of the learned District Forum, Jaipur 1^st dated 16.4.2018 whereby the claim is allowed against the appellant.

 

The contention of the appellant is that the university is not deficient. They have provided the guide on 17.12.2010 and respondent could not submit synopsis as per the satisfaction of the guide hence, the claim should have been dismissed.

 

Per contra the contention of the respondent is that guide has not been appointed and further more no guidance was given by him. He was not available hence, the fee has rightly been refunded.

 

Heard the counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as original record of the case.

 

The only contention of the respondent in the complaint was that the university has not provided the guide to him even the guide has not been made a party and Anx. A 1 clearly shows that in December 2010 the guide was provided to the consumer. It is not in dispute that the registration fee was

3

 

deposited in October 2010.

 

The contention during the argument was that Ec. A 1 was never received by him but again it is not true as it contains the signature of the respondent dated 17.12.2010 and further Ex. A 2 to A 5 documents were also communicated to the respondent that some comments have been made on the synopsis of the respondent which were ever cured by the respondent has not been shown.

 

In view of the above, when guide was appointed timely, no deficiency could be attributed to the appellant. The appeal is allowed and the order of the Forum below dated 16.4.2018 is set aside.

 

(Meena Mehta) (K.K.Bagri) (Nisha Gupta)

Member Member President

 

 

nm