This case coming on 02.07.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri Ch. Ravi Kumar, Advocate for the Complainant and Smt. C. Uma Devi & Sri M. Venkata Ramana ,Advocates for the Opposite Party and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

                                                ORDER

(As per the Honourable Male Member on behalf of the Bench)

1.       The Complainant asks the Forum to pass an order in her favour and against the Opposite Party:  a) for complaint amount of Rs.8,160/- (Rupees Eight thousand one hundred and sixty only), b) subsequent interest @ 24% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of realization of the principal amount, c) for damages for the negligence of the Opposite Party the compensation of Rs.50,000/- and d) for costs of the complaint; and e) for such other relief or reliefs as the Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2.       The Opposite Party strongly resisted the claim of the Complainant and asked the Forum to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.

3.       The case of the Complainant, as can be seen from the complaint, is that the Opposite Party took Rs.6,000/- on 11.11.2009 for the purpose of conducting the course of Intermediate (One Sitting) privately.   The Complainant stated that the Opposite Party is having a study centre at Dwarakanagar, Visakhapatnam and conducting courses like Intermediate (One Sitting), Degree and Post Graduation Course for private appearance for the students and collecting amount to conduct the above said courses.   The Complainant attracted by paper advertisement and Advertising Boards, approached the Opposite Party to conduct the course of Intermediate (One Sitting) through correspondence course.   The Complainant gave an amount of Rs.6,000/- for the above course to the Opposite Party on 11.11.2009 and the Opposite Party gave her receipt for the above course.   Since 11.11.2009 the Opposite Party never conducted any course to the Complainant and he never gave any information to her for the above course.   The Opposite Party promised the Complainant that the Opposite Party would send her to the examination to be conducted in March, 2010.   The Opposite Party failed to send the Complainant to the examination, further he never gave any reply to the Complainant.   Hence, the Complainant several times approached the Opposite Party to send for future coming examinations, but the Opposite Party never sent her to the forth coming examination.    Hence, the Complainant was vexed with the Opposite Party’s promises and finally issued a legal notice dated 14.06.2011.    The Registered Legal Notice was not taken by the Opposite Party intentionally and returned back on 21.06.2011 to the addressee as undelivered with postal remarks.      The Complainant stated that she approached the Opposite Party for refund of the amount of Rs.6,000/- with interest but the Opposite Party never refunded the Complainant’s amount, he kept quiet and shown his negligence towards the Complainant.  Hence, this Complaint.

4.       The Complainant filed a proof affidavit besides written arguments to support her claim.   Exs. A1 to A3 are marked for the Complainant.

5.       On the other hand, the Opposite Party resisted the claim of the Complainant by contending, as can be seen from its counter, that in fact along with the Complainant number of students joined in the Opposite Party organization for the intermediate one sitting course and they have all the students attended the examinations for the year, 2010.   The National Institute of Open Schooling also issued hall ticket bearing No.920110303048 to the Complainant and informed her to attend the examination held in center No.20147 i.e., Shanthiniketan Degree College, KK Complex, Ranasthalam, Srikakulam District.   But one way or other, the Complainant did not attend the examinations, inspite of best course given by the Opposite Party.   The reasons are best known to the Complainant for non-attending the examinations.   The identity card, hall ticket and marks list of the Complainant are presented before this Forum.    In fact, the Complainant prepared only for attending the examinations conducted in the month of October, 2010, but not in the month of March, 2010 as mentioned in the Complaint.    In the said circumstances, it clearly shows that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party and only on part of the Complainant’s negligence.    The Complainant’s averment that the Complainant had approached the Opposite Party and demanded to refund the amount of Rs.6,000/- with interest, but the Opposite Party failed to pay the said amount are all absolutely false, not correct and the Complainant is put to strict proof of the same.   In fact the Complainant never approached the Opposite Party.

6.       The Opposite Party filed an evidence affidavit besides written arguments to buttress its contention.       Exs.B1 to Ex.B3 are marked for the Opposite Party.

7.       The matter has been heard on behalf of the Complainant as well as the Opposite Party.     

8.         After careful perusal of the case record, this Forum finds that the payment of Rs.6,000/- on 11.11.2009 was established by Ex.A1 Admission Slip and is admitted by the Opposite Party.   But we can perceive no service by the Opposite Party in lieu of the amount paid by the Complainant.   But the Opposite Party, along with its counter, presented Ex.B1 (Student Identity Card), Ex.B2 (Intimation Letter Oct/Nov. 2010 Examination), and also Ex.B3 (Marks Sheet) to show that the Opposite Party was doing everything for the Complainant.   But presentation of these 3 documents by the Opposite Party before this Forum rightly boomerangs on the Opposite Party itself.   This is so because the Student Identity Card (Ex.B1),Intimation Letter Oct/Nov-2010 Examination (Ex.B2), and also a Marks Sheet (Ex.B3) which have to be promptly given to the complainant-examinee at  respective stages are prima facie retained by the Opposite Party-middle man for the reasons best known to it.   This clearly shows that by mischievously retaining the necessary documents viz., Exs.B1 to B3, the Opposite Party definitely marred the chances of the Complainant to appear for the promised examination.   It can be clearly seen that by retaining the necessary documents with it, the Opposite Party effectively pursuing the Complainant from preempted her studies.   This shows malafides on the part of the Opposite Party and such action amounts of deficiency of service coupled with unfair trade practice.   So, the Complainant is entitled to get refund of the amount paid by her and she is entitled to interest too, on the said amount from the date of its payment.   Moreover, the deficiency of service coupled with unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party should have caused much physical hardship and mental agony to the Complainant; she is entitled to some compensation also.   Moreover, as the Complainant is forced to file this complaint because of the deficiency of service cum unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party, she is entitled to costs of this complaint too. 

9.       In the result, this Forum directs the Opposite Party: 1) to refund Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six thousand only) with interest @ 9% p.a. from 11.11.2009 till  the date of actual realization, and to pay 2) a compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only ) and 3) Costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the Complainant.   Time for compliance, one month 

     Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the 19^th  day of July, 2014.

Sd/-                                                                                          Sd/-

President                                                                            Male Member

                             APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

For the Opposite Party:-                                    

Sd/-                                                                                          Sd/-

President                                                                            Male Member