Judgment : Dt.5.7.2017
This is a complaint made by Jit Singh, son of Mr. Swapan Ram, 7A, Picnic Garden Road, P.S.-Tiljala, Kolkata-700 039 against – (1) Bengal Institute of Business Studies, 18D, Lake View Road, P.S.-Lake,Kolkata-700 029, OP No.1 and (2) Vidyasagar University, P.O.-Vidyasagar University, Midnapore, Dist.-Paschim Midnapore, PIN-721 102, OP No.2, praying for order directing OP No.1 to refund Rs.1,38,000/- on account of admission, semester, uniform and miscellaneous fees plus interest charged by the Bank over the loan amount and also the insurance premium paid along with 18% interest, also a direction upon the OPs to pay Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for playing with the career of the Complainant, causing mental agony, physical harassment and spoiling of the entire academic career and an order directing the OPs to discontinue such unfair trade practice and cost of the proceeding.
Facts in brief are that Complainant after obtaining Bachelor Degree intended to go for a post-graduate course of MBA and started searching for a good educational institute in Kolkata for pursuing MBA. OP No.1 by using several channels of media and observing the website found that OP No.1 advertised that they provide two year full time management programme in their institute. It was, further advertised that OP No.1 is affiliated to the OP No.2 Vidyasagar University for providing two year full time MBA course. After fulfillment of the formalities and requirements, Complainant was offered to be eligible to take admission in two year full time MBA course in the Session 2015-2017 and paid Rs.34,000/-. Total course fee was Rs.3,56,000/- as intimated to the Complainant vide letter dt.17.4.2015. Complainant paid Rs.34,000/- in two installments, Rs.14,000/- and Rs.20,000/- against proper receipt apart from admission fee, Complainant also paid Rs.1,04,300/- vide D.D. No.933032 dt.29.08.2015 drawn on the Syndicate Bank on account of first semester fees of Rs.84,000/- and Rs.20,000/- towards uniform and miscellaneous fees.
Complainant arranged the sum of money by taking education loan from the Syndicate Bank. Prior to the admission in the Institute of OP No.1, the Complainant in order to confirm the advertisement of the OP No.1 claiming to be affiliated with the Vidyasagar University, visited the website of the University, wherein OP No.2 also confirmed that OP No.1 was affiliated to OP No.2 and after getting the said confirmation became assured and paid the money. In order to find the actual truth, Complainant sent a letter dt.26.11.2015 to PIO, Vidyasagar University, under Section 6 of the RTI Act, seeking information as to whether OP No.1 is affiliated to OP No.2 or not. In response to the above letter, the Vidyasagar University sent letter dt.21.12.2015 with copy of the annexures and informed Complainant that no regular course is affiliated to Bengal Institute of Business Studies for the academic year 2015-16. As per resolution of 7th Executive Council in its meeting dt.30.6.2014. This letter reveals that course of MBA 2015-2017 of the OP No.1 was not affiliated to OP No.2 and OP No.1 was not permitted for admission for the course other annexures attached with the reply of SPI, the Vidyasagar University make it clear that OP No.1 was not affiliated with OP No.2. Complainant again visited the website of OP No.2 to find out the truth and found that the name of OP No.1 was reflected as affiliated colleges by OP No.2. When the Complainant reported this matter to OP No.1, the Complainant was given assurance that soon everything would be made available after getting affiliation from OP No.2. OP No.1 in spite of being fully aware as OP No.1 has no affiliation. Inspite of admission for the course received admission fee. Thereafter, Complainant sent a lawyer’s notice to the OPs for refund of the money. But of no use. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP No.2 filed written version and denied the allegations of the Complainant. Further, OP No.2 clearly stated that Complainant took admission under OP No.I in two year MBA course, after paying admission course and other fees and he was deceived by the OP No.1. Further, this OP has stated that the question of non-affiliation of OP No.1 does not arise. Copy of the office memo and examination of OP No.1 makes it clear that there was affiliation of OP No.1 by OP No.2. This OP has stated that OP No.1 was affiliated under OP No.2 and Complainant was not misled and no unfair practice was used upon him. It is denied that OP NO.2 did not permit OP No.1 for MBA course for 2015-17. So, this OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint petition.
OP No.1 also filed written version and has denied the allegations of the Complainant. Further, OP No.1 has also stated that it never misled Complainant and did not deceive the Complainant at any point of time. OP No.1 has clearly stated that whatever was published in the official website of the OP No.1 and also OP No.2 are always were true and Complainant himself took the decision of dis-continuance the admission. OP No.1 always remained affiliated to OP No.2 and this affiliation still exists. In the website of OP No.2 it is clearly mentioned that OP No.1 has authority to take admission in two years MBA course. OP No.1 never misled the Complainant. So, this OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Decision with reasons
Complainant has filed affidavit-in-chief, against which all the OPs have put questionnaire to which Complainant has replied. Similarly, OPs have filed affidavit-in-chief to which Complainant put questionnaire to which OPs made reply.
Points for determination are as follows:
Whether there was deficiency in service by OP,
Whether OPs made unfair trade practice,
Whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
All the three points are taken up together for the sake of brevity of convenience.
Complainant has filed certain documents in order to establish the allegations. At the outset, he has filed Xerox copy of the advertisement made by OP No.1, which clearly reveals that OP No.1 was affiliated to OP No.2. Thereafter, he has filed Xerox copy of the list of the affiliated colleges by OP No.2, which clearly establishes that OP No.1 was affiliated to OP No.2. He has also filed the copy of invitation sent to the Complainant, which was sent in the month of April. He has also filed Xerox copy of the payment made by him. It is his contention that he paid Rs.1,38,000/-. This fact has not been disputed by either of the OPs. Complainant has filed the copy of sanction letter from the Syndicate Bank of the loan amount, out of which Complainant deposited Rs.1,38,000/-.
Crux of the dispute is one letter which was sent by the Vidyasagar University to the Complainant in pursuance of a RTI application made by the Complainant. This letter is dated 21.12.2015. It says – “No regular course of MBA is affiliated to Bengal Institute of Business Studies for the Academic Year 2015-16”. Further, it says that no Institute is permitted to get admission into MBA course under Distance Learning Mode, as per Resolutions dt.30.6.2014. Actually, this letter led Complainant to believe that he was cheated. However, it appears that this letter was issued on 21.12.2015 when Complainant had already paid Rs.1,38,000/- for which the Complainant has filed this case. Further, one resolution dt.8.7.2014 is also filed to establish that OP No.1 was not affiliated to OP No.2 for taking admission in session 2015-16 for MBA course.
The contention of the OPs are that OP No.1 was always affiliated with OP No.2. In their support, OPs have filed one schedule of examination dt.1.3.2016 of MBA first semester. In this letter it is also mentioned that the stamp belong to OP No.1 are permitted. Now, question arises as to whether Complainant got deprived by the act of OPs. Complainant in his complaint has clearly mentioned that he was assured by the OP No.1 that course was affiliated. It is also clear that Complainant after being convinced paid the money. But, after getting the information on the basis of the letter of December, 2015, Complainant got perturbed and discontinued the course and for that reason he was compelled to file this complaint.
If we take a overview, we find that the mistakes have been committed by Complainant as well as the OPs which has contributed to the filing of this complaint. Complainant committed the mistake by not believing the assurance of OP No.1 and relying on the letter issued by Vidyasagar University in December, 2015 the basis of which was a resolution of 2014. Similarly, OP No.2 committed mistake by issuing letter where it did not remain mentioned that the dispute of affiliation got resolved and that is why OP No.2 issued the examination schedule of first semester of the session 2015-17. OP No.1 made mistake by not informing the Complainant about the resolution of 2014 relating to the dispute of affiliation amongst themselves.
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the view that if OP No.1 is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the Complainant, object of justice would be served. So far as compensation and litigation cost are concerned we do not find any ground for allowing them.
Hence,
ordered
CC/409/2016 and the same is allowed on contest in part against OP No.1 and dismissed against OP No.2. OP No.1 is directed to pay Rs.50,000/- to the Complainant within two months of this order, in default the amount shall carry interest of 10%p.a. till realization.
