Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

83/2012

D.P.Suresh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

WLC Wigan & Leigh College - Opp.Party(s)

M.G.Harikrishnan

24 Nov 2015

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   06.09. 2011

                                                                        Date of Order :   24.11.2015.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

                 DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

C.C.NO.83/2012

TUESDAY THIS  24^TH  DAY OF NOVEMBER  2015

 

D.P. Suresh Kumar,

S/o. D. Padmanabhan,

57/28, Subbaishini Garden,

1B Block,

Paper Mills Road,

Perambur,

Chennai 600 011.                                          ..Complainant

                                      ..Vs..

 

1. The Administrative Officer,

WLC WIGAN & LEIGH COLLEGE,

No.17, MOUROYS Gate Road,

Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018.

 

2. The Administrative Officer,

WLC WIGAN & LETGH COLLEGE,

No.38,Nehru Place,

Angel Tower Cool 1005,

New Delhi 110 019.                                         ..Opposite parties.  

 

 

For the Complainant                 :   M/s. M.G.Harikrishnan  

 

For the Opposite parties            :   M/s. Deepak Sabharwal Associates.

 

        This complaint is being filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P. Act 1986 for a direction to the opposite parties  to return the amount of Rs.1,24,000/- remitted by the complainant towards fees  and also to pay compensation with cost of the complaint  to the complainant.

ORDER

 

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

         

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-

The opposite party is the college for Animation of New Media course of conducted.   The complainant for applied the said course he has appeared for the test held on 15^th June 2005 and was selected for the admission of the said post.  Accordingly the complainant also paid first year fees to the opposite party.   The complainant also attended the said course for the first year in the 3^rd semester among them he has attended fully in the 1^st and 2^nd semester and 3^rd semester partly and discontinued the course.   Therefore the complainant has discontinued the said course in the 3^rd semester of the 1^st year.   Though the complainant is being attended the first year course and also paid necessary fees for the first year he came to know that there is no proper infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the smooth and efficient functioning of the course provided by the opposite parties in the collect for the said studies while so the opposite parties have demanded the complainant to pay 2^nd year fees as such the complainant was not willing to discontinue the course and discontinued his studies of the said course.  As such the one year life time of the study was wasted and payment made for the said course a sum of Rs.1,24,000/- was wasted which amount to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  Though the complainant has sent legal notice for refund of the said amount the opposite parties have not returned the said amount to the complainant but reply notice was given by the opposite parties.   As such the complainant has sought for to return the amount of Rs.1,24,000/- remitted by the complainant towards fees  and also to pay compensation with cost of the complaint  to the complainant.    

Written version of   opposite party is  as follows:-

2.     It denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite parties stated that as per the terms and conditions and the agreement attached with the application applied by the complainant for the payment of course fee if paid by the complainant to the opposite parties cannot be refundable.  Further the complainant having admitted in the course of  Animation of New Media two year course and having attended first year course for which the class were started  on 30.8.2005 in the first semester 90%, second semester 80% and third semester 49% where after he discontinued the course of his own violation without informing the college.  He is not entitled for the refund of the said amount paid towards the course of study.    The opposite party has not provided necessary infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the smooth and efficient functioning of the course are all not proved, such allegations were made without any basis since no equipments or laboratories for the functioning of the said course are necessary concerning the nature of the said course of studies.   Therefore the reason stated by the complainant for his discontinuing the course is not true, and the complainant having discontinued the course of his own wish after completion of first year of the said course seeking refund of the amount paid by the complainant for the said study is not maintainable.   On the legal notice given by the complainant to the opposite party, the opposite party  properly replied.  

3.     Further during the 3^rd semester of the first year course for the absent of the complainant in attending the class he also applied for leave on the medical ground.  Contrary to such fact making allegation for his discontining the course against the opposite parties are all not true. Further the complaint filed by the complainant is also not in time but barred by limitation.  This forum itself has dismissed the complaint earlier by order dated  14.6.2011 against which the complainant has preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission in F.A.No.649/2011 which was also dismissed of his own instance.   Therefore the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed.

4.   Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and  Ex.A1 to Ex.A12 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Opposite parties have filed their proof affidavit and Ex.B1 to Ex.B7 filed on the side of the opposite parties. 

5.         The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties ?

 

2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?  

 

 

6.      POINTS 1 & 2 :

Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, written version filed by the opposite parties, proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the  opposite parties and the documents   Ex.A1 to Ex.A12 filed on the side of the complainant and the documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B7 filed on the said of the opposite parties and considered the both side arguments.

7.     There is no disputes between the parties that the opposite party is the college which provides course of studies the Animation of New Media course of conducted.   The complainant for applied the said course he has appeared for the test held on 15^th June 2005 and was selected for the admission of the said post.  Accordingly the complainant also paid first year fees to the opposite party as mentioned in the complaint as per Ex.A1 to Ex.A6.   The complainant also attended the said course for the first year in the 3^rd semester among them he has attended fully in the 1^st and 2^nd semester and 3^rd semester partly and discontinued the course.   Therefore the complainant has discontinued the said course in the 3^rd semester of the 1^st year. 

8.     The complainant main grievance raised in the complaint that though the complainant is being attended the first year course and also paid necessary fees for the first year he came to know that there is no proper infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the smooth and efficient functioning of the course provided by the opposite parties in the collect for the said studies while so the opposite parties have demanded the complainant to pay 2^nd year fees as such the complainant was not willing to continue the course and discontinued his studies of the said course.  As such the one year life time of the study was wasted and payment made for the said course a sum of Rs.1,24,000/- was wasted which amount to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  Though the complainant has sent legal notice Ex.A7 for refund of the said amount the opposite parties have not returned the said amount to the complainant but reply notice Ex.A8 was given by the opposite parties.    The complainant has filed this complaint seeking to refund the said amount to the complainant and to pay compensation with litigation charges against the opposite parties.

9.     Whereas the opposite parties have resisted the complaint  by saying that as per the terms and conditions and the agreement attached with the application applied by the complainant for the payment of course fee if paied by the complainant to the opposite parties cannot be refundable.  Further the complainant having admitted in the course of  Animation of New Media two year course and having attended first year course for which the class were started  on 30.8.2005 in the first semester 90%, second semester 80% and third semester 49% where after he discontinued the course of his own violation without informing the college,  he is not entitled for the refund of the said amount paid towards the course of study.    Further the allegation made by the complainant in the compliant that the opposite party has not provided necessary infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the smooth and efficient functioning of the course are all not proved, such  allegations were made without any basis since no equipments or laboratories for the functioning of the said course are necessary concerning the nature of the said course of studies.   Therefore the reason stated by the complainant for his discontinuing the course is not true, and the complainant having discontinued the course of his own wish after completion of first year of the said course seeking refund of the amount paid by the complainant for the said study is not maintainable.  The legal notice Ex.A7 given by the complainant to the opposite party  and the opposite party was properly replied by the reply notice dated 4.10.2010 i.e. Ex.A8.  Further during the 3^rd semester of the first year course for the absent of the complainant in attending the class is also applied for leave on the medical ground.  Contrary to such fact making allegation for his discontinued the course against the opposite parties are all not true and where made for the purpose of this case. 

10.    Further the complaint filed by the complainant is also not in time but barred by limitation.  This forum itself as dismissed the complaint earlier by order dated  14.6.2011 against the complainant has preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission in F.A.No.649/2011 which was also dismissed and his own instance.   Therefore the complaint filed by the complainant is liable to be dismissed.

11.    On perusal of record reveals that the complainant has filed the petition condone delay of 1131 days in filing this complaint in CMP 529/2011 and the same was allowed on 16.4.2012, since the respondents/opposite parties have remained exparte.  Consequence to the said order this compliant was taken on file by this forum on 16.4.2012.   Therefore the contention raised by the opposite parties that this complaint is not filed by the complainant within the limitation period as per Sec.24 (A) of the C.P. Act is not considered to be valid.   Though as contended by the opposite parties original complaint filed by the complainant in S.R.953/2010  was rejected by this forum by order dated 14.6.2011 as the said complaint was barred by limitation as per order passed by the Hon’ble State Commission in F.A.No.649/2011 dated 15.7.2011  the said appeal was dismissed by the same order there was an observation mentioned that if the appellant is advised he can file fresh petition invoking Sec.24(A) of the Consumer Protection Act and the District Forum decided the petition on merit.  On the said basis of the order, this complaint was filed with condone delay petition under section 24(A) of the Consumer Protection Act and the same was allowed as mentioned above in CMP 529/2011 dated 16.4.2012 as such this complaint was taken on file to the consequence of the order passed  in the said CMP529/2011 after condoning the delay of 1131 days in filing this complaint.  

12.    The complainant has raised main grievance that he has discontinued the course of study on the ground that there is no proper infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the smooth and efficient functioning of the course were not provided by the opposite parties for the said studies of the course in their college by the opposite parties.  If the said reason stated by the complainant for his discontinue of course is true the complainant would have raised such allegations at the beginning or at the starting of the course itself.   But the complainant  was not did so.  But as contented by the opposite parties the complainant has raised such allegations against the opposite parties only after attending the 1^st and 2^nd semester and portion of  the 3^rd semester of the 1^st year of the said course i.e while attended the portion of the 3^rd semester and being absent in attending class and applied for medical leave and has raised such allegations belatedly cannot be considered to be based on true facts.   But appears to be false allegations against the opposite parties for the reason best known to the complainant on the eve of his discontinuing the course of his own wish.   Further there is no such proof of discontinuing by other students who have attended the course along with the complainant for the said course on the side of complainant.  Therefore as contended by the opposite parties the reason stated by the complainant against the opposite parties that the opposite parties have not provided infrastructure and sufficient equipments for the study of the course on the said reason the complainant was discontinued the course is not acceptable.  But the complainant has discontinued the course after attending major part of the first year course on his own wish, the reason best known to the complainant is acceptable.  Further since the complainant has attended the major portion of the first year course i.e. first semester 90% second semester 80% and third semester 49% and absent for attending the class and discontinued the course of his own.   The complainant has exhausted the period of course for which he has paid the complaint mentioned fees of Rs.1,24,000/- is also acceptable as contended by the opposite parties.   As such the complainant is not entitled for any relief from the opposite parties as sought for in the complaint.   On the other hand it is also acceptable that due to discontinue the course by the complainant the two years of the said course was kept vacant as such caused monitory loss to the opposite parties by the complainant.

13.    Therefore we are of the considered view that the allegations attributed against the opposite parties by the complainant in the complaint and the deficiency of service attributed against the opposite parties are not proved by the complainant.   As such the complainant is not entitled for any relief sought for against the opposite parties 1 & 2 and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties have to bear their own cost of litigation and accordingly the points 1 & 2 are decided.  

        In the result, the complaint is dismissed.  No cost.

Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the 24^th   day of November   2015.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents :

Ex.A1- 20.6.2005 - Copy of admission intimation letter.

Ex.A2- 24.6.2005 - Copy of Receipt for Rs.1200/-

Ex.A3- 16.9.2005- Copy of receipt for Rs.56,000/-

Ex.A4- 19.12.2005-Copy of receipt for Rs.34,000/-

Ex.A5- 16.12.2005 –Copy of D.D.NO.314894

Ex.A6- 21.6.2005   - Copy of D.D.No.161270 for Rs.20,000/-

Ex.A7- 6.9.2010  - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A8- 4.10.2010 –Copy of reply notice.

Ex.A9-       -      -Copy of Disability Certificate.

Ex.A10-     -      -Copy of WLC college prospectus

Ex.A11-     -      - Copy of Attendance Sheet

Ex.A12- 6.11.2006-Copy of letter mentioning the amount of fees

                             remitted and the sudden close of the Institution.

 

 

Opposite parties’ side  documents:

Ex.B1- 15.7.2011 - Copy of order in F.A.No.659/2011.

Ex.B2-       -      - Copy of the prospectus.

Ex.B3- 2.10.2006 - Copy of letter of the complainant.

Ex.B4- 15.12.2005-Copy of email from the complainant.

Ex.B5- 15.12.2005-Copy of reply to the email.

Ex.B6- 6.9.2010  -Copy of notice from the complainant.

Ex.B7- 4.10.2010 -Copy of reply notice to the complainant.

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.