Date of Filing: 14.02.2020
Date of Order: 29.01.2021
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B., PRESIDENT
HON’BLE Sri K.RAM MOHAN, B.Sc. M.A L.L.B., MEMBER
On this the Friday the 29th day of January, 2021
C.C.No. 118 /2020
Between
- Kushal Asopa,
S/o Late Vijay Prakash Asopa,
Aged 24 years, Occ: Pvt employee,
- Smt. Premalata Asopa,
W/o Late. Vijay Prakash Asopa,
Occ: Pvt Employee, age 57 years,
Both are R/o: LIG 257, Road No.9,
Huda Colony, Attapur, Hyderabad,
Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy Dist,
Hyderabad Telangna
….Complainants
And
Woxzen School of Business,
Rep by its authorized Signatory,
Corp. office : Road No. 36,
1267, 2nd floor, Gateway Jubilee,
Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad
.
… Opposite Party
Counsel for the Complainants : Mr.P.Ravi Kumar
Counsel for the Opposite party : Mr. Vimal Varma Vasireddy
O R D E R
(By Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B., PRESIDENT on behalf of the Bench)
1. This Complaint has been preferred U/s 12 of Consumer protection Act 1986 alleging that failure to refund the fee collected from complainant by the opposite party after withdrawal amount’s to unfair trade practice, hence a direction to opposite party to refund the fee with interest @ 18% p.a and award a total compensation of Rs. 6,57,000/- for loss on academic year to the student, causing mental agony and legal expenses etc.
2. The complainants case in brief is that first complainant is son of the second complainant who approached the opposite party for an admission into Post Graduate Diploma in Management for the first complainant and by then the last date for admission in to course was over. Opposite party assured a definite admission with a good placement and education tour to Singapoor during the course of it. Believing the same on application bearing No. WSBY161427884 was submitted on basing on it opposite party issued admission offer letter dt. 19.07.2018 tofirst complainant for admission into Post Graduate Diploma in Management program for the academic year commencing June 2018 to May 2020. Total fee payable was Rs. 17,30,000/- and to payment Rs. 1,00,000/- immediately as admission commitment for blocking in favour of the first complainant. It was further promised by opposite party that education loan would be arranged by AVANSE with which opposite party has a tie up. Hence the complainants have submitted of the require documents to AVANSE finance service for processing the loan. Before the sanction of the loan opposite party enrolled the first complainant stand and insisted upon the second complainant to send the first complainant classes for process and pay commitment fee of Rs. 1,00,000/-. She was also insisted upon to issue cheques for Rs. 1,00,000/- towards admission commitment and she complied it.
3. After encashment of the cheque issued by the second complainant for Rs. 1,00,000/- the complainants were orally informed by AVANSE that loan would not be processed and a letter of rejection dt. 29.11.2018 stating was that they were unable to process loan application as it does not meet internal criteria of AVANSE and no further ground were mentioned for rejection of the loan application. The second complainant sent a mail to opposite party seeking requests with regard to financial aid, but here was no response. The opposite party did not help in convensing the AVANSE for sanction of the loan. Since the complainants were totally dependent on the loan and and some was denied they had no option except to withdraw the first complainant from the intuitions and accordingly the second complainant made a requests with opposite party to send back the first complainant as she was unable to meet the expenditure fee. She further requested opposite party for refund of the commitment fee paid after adjusting proportionate amount for the short stay from 25.07.2108 to 17.08.2018. But opposite party refused stating that “As per AICTE norms if a student leaves after joining the course and a seat consequently false vacant by the last date of admission institution cannot return the fees” In the present case opposite party was approached after expiry of the last date for admission i.e, before admission of the first complainant itself seat was vacant and therefore the question of consequent vacant was seat does not arise. It is evident that opposite party offered a seat after the admission date and by then seat was already vacant. The opposite party made false promise that education loan would be arranged through AVANSE group with which it got tie up and thereby induced the complainants in making payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as admission of commitment fee. The first complainant has lost valuable academic year and both complainants have suffered mental agony on account of withdrawal of the first complainant from the institution as promised education loan was not sanctioned. In the process the first complainant bright future effected the also suffered health and time loss. The opposite party denied the refund on improper, irrelevant and unreasonable grounds. Hence the present complaint for the above stated releifs.
4. After service of notice of complaint the opposite party made appearance through its Advocate who filed Vakalath on 17.03.2020, but thereafter failed to appeared and not filed a written version till 16.11.2020. Hence this commission treated that the opposite party has no written version to offer.
5. In the enquiry complainants got filed evidence affidavit of first complainant reiterating material facts narrated in the complaint and in support of oral evidence eleven documents are got exhibited for them.
6. On a consideration of material brought record the following points have emerged for determination.
- Whether the complainants have made out a case unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.?
- Whether the complainants are entitled for the relief sought for.?
- To what relief.?
Point No.1:-
It is evident from ExA1 admission offer letter from the opposite party for 2 years Diploma Course in Post Graduate Managing, the opposite party offered admission to the first complainant and total fee payable was Rs. 17,30,000/- and out of which Rs. 1,00,000/- his shown as admission commitment fee. This Ex.A1 letter is dt. 19.07.2018 and second complainant was asked to confirm the admission on the same day of receiving of the letter and remit the amount by 20.06.2018 i.e, on next day itself. Ex.A2 is the letter from the opposite party mentioning the detail of the amounts being charged for the course offered Ex.A3 Xerox copy of cheque issued by the second complainant in favour of the opposite party dated 21.07.2018 Ex.A4 statement of Account from draee Back of cheque shows the said cheque was enchased by the opposite party on 25.07.2018. So it is crystal clear that soon after receipt of admission offer letter the complainants have made payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as admission commitment fee. It is the case of the complainants that by the date the approach for the seat for the first complainant, the admission process for the enrolment of the year was closed and even than the opposite party offered the seat and it shows by them seat was vacate in the course with the opposite party. It is specifications of the complainants that opposite party told that it has tie up with AVANSI finance services to arrange education loan to the complainants and since second complainant has no finance capacity to meet the total cost of the course and dependent and education loan and the believed opposite party and paid Rs. 1,00,000/- and initiated the process with the said finance services for the loan. ExA7 is the letter from AVANSI finance services informing the second complainant that it was unable to process the loan as loan application does not meet internal criteria of the firm. Hence left with no alternative the second complainant decided to withdraw the first complainant from the program and sought for refund of the fee paid after deducting the proportionate amount for the short stay but it was rejected by opposite party.
It is evidence that the complainant came forward to enroll the first complainant in the program only on account of the presentation given by opposite party for arranging the education loan as it got a tie up and when there was no prospects of education loan withdraw first complainant. But for the assurance given by the opposite party the complainant would not have opted for the admission of the first complainant’s with opposite party and pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as admission commitment fee. The ground under which opposite party refused to refund the amount has no relevence in this particular care , because by the date of the approach to the opposite party, by the complainant the admission processes for student was over and seat was already vacant. Hence refusal to refund the fee collected from the complainants after adjusting the proportionate amount certainly an unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly point is answered.
Point No.2
On account of the withdrawal from the study program after spending more than one month with the institutions the first complainant lost an academic year and by refusing to refund the amount, the opposite party caused mental agony. It is evidence that the opposite party made false promise of arranging loan with a financial services with whom it got a tie up. As already said opposite party has knowledge of the contents of the present complaint, since it has received the notice and appeared through Advocate. Before filing of complaint also the complainants has got issued a legal notice under Ex.A9 which was served on opposite party under Ex.A11 postal acknowledgment. Failure to file written version and offer an evidence contracting the stand of the complainant amounts an implied admission of the entire case of the complaint including inconvenience suffered by complainants . Hence the complainants are entitled for grant of compensation apart from refund of amount collected from the complainant and costs of legal expenses incurred by them. Accordingly point is answered.
Point No.3
In the result, complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite party to refund an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- with interest @12% p.a from 25.07.2018 to the date of payment. The opposite party further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as a compensation for loss of academic year by the first complainant and further sum of Rs. 50,000/- for causing mental agony and inconvenience to both the complainants. The opposite party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards legal expenses incurred by the complainants.
Time for compliance 45 days from the date of service of this order.
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by him, pronounced by us on this 29th the day of January, 2021.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESS EXAMINED
NIL
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Complainants:
Ex.A1– Copy of Admission offer letter dt. 19.07.2018 issued by Op.
Ex.A2 – Copy of fee structure (2018-2019)
Ex.A3 - Copy of Cheque dt. 21.07.2018.
Ex.A4 – Copy of Bank Statement showing encashment of cheque.
Ex.A5 – Copy of E-mail dt. 12.08.2018.
Ex.A6 – Copy of E-mail dt. 18.08.2018.
Ex.A7 – Copy of Loan rejection letter dt. 29.11.2018.
Ex.A8 – Copy of student No due form.
Ex.A9 – Copy of Legal notice dt. 22.07.2019
Ex.A10 – Copy of postal receipt dt. 23.07.2019.
Ex.A11 – Copy of postal acknowledgment.
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Opposite parties:
Nil.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
