Per Shri Pradeep G Kadu, Hon’ble President
1) This is a consumer complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 filed by above named Complainants and the briefly stated facts of the case and contentions of the Complainants are as follows:-
a) The Complainant No.1 herein Mr Chirag Sheth is the father of Complainant No.2-Ms Ziya Sheth who resides in Ghatkopar, Mumbai. During search of good school of IB (International Baccalaureate), he came to know about the Education Initiative Trust, Bombay International School (BIS) i.e. the Opposite Party herein, which is a private school conducts the said Course. Accordingly, he took admission for his daughter in August-2021 by making payment of Rs.6,02,550/-.
b) Thereafter, the Complainant’s daughter secured admission in a school closer to their residence and the Complainant No.1 decided to withdraw his daughter's admission from BIS. Accordingly, the Complainant No.1 vide his email dated 02/03/2022 informed BIS about the same and requested for refund of the fees. The Opposite Party however, refunded only Rs.20,000/- and forfeited remaining amount citing terms and conditions of their policy.
c) The Complainants made several attempts to convince school authorities to deduct reasonable amount on account of cancellation of admission, as they had intimated to the school well in advance before the start of academic year for which the admission sought. However, the school authorities did not refund the remaining school fees amount.
d) As no option left with the Complainants for the refund of money, they approached this Commission for necessary relief and hence, this complaint has been filed by them.
Contentions of the Opposite Party
2) After perusing the facts of the matter, the case was admitted on 29/08/2022 against the Opposite Party by this Commission and notice was issued to the Opposite Party, which was duly served as confirmed from the records produced before this Commission. Several opportunities were given to the Opposite Party to represent the matter before this Commission. However, the Opposite Party chooses to remain absent. Hence, in the interest of justice, order was passed to continue the proceeding Ex-Parte against the Opposite Party on 21/05/2024.
Argument of the Complainant
3) On behalf of the Complainants Learned Adv Mr.Shubham Mehta appeared before this Commission and filed affidavit of evidence, email correspondences with the Opposite Party and brief notes of written argument of the Complainants. Adv Mr Mehta also referred some citations in support of his contentions and prayed for refund of fees amount alongwith compensation for mental agony and legal expenses. The facts of the matter are discussed as below.
Observations of the facts in the case
4) The Complainant No.1 after seeking admission for his daughter has paid Rs.6,02,550/- in the following manner.
a) Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) as admission fees on 15/08/2021;
b) Rs.4,82,550/- (Rupees Four Lakh EightyTwo Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Only) towards 1stTerm fees on 30/08/2021;
c) Rs.20,000 (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) towards security deposit on 15/08/2021.
5) The said amount of fees was paid for the academic period of 2022-23 was supposed to start in July-2022.
6) Thereafter, the Complainant’s daughter secured admission in a school closer to their residence, and the Complainant No.1 decided to withdraw his daughter's admission with BIS. Accordingly, the Complainant No.1 vide his email dated 02/03/2022 informed BIS about the same and requested for refund of the fees.
7) BIS vide its email dated 05/03/2022 stated that as per the refund policy, BIS will only refund the security deposit of Rs.20,000/- against production of original fee receipt. Accordingly BIS refunded Rs.20,000/- on 25/07/2022.
8) After making several attempts by the Complainants through email, the Opposite Party in reply to the notice of the Complainant informed him through their Advocate that as per terms and conditions of refund policy :-
a) All fees is non-refundable;
b) Security deposit of Rs.20,000/- (on production of receipt) will be refunded when the student leaves school after adjusting toward an arrears.
9) There is no reference of any document about the policy of refund which school authorities relying.
10) Considering all the facts and submissions and based on our observations and analysis, we record our findings in the said matter on the following issues are as below :-
Sr. No. | Points | Findings |
1. | Whether the Complainants in this case are the consumers of the Opposite Party ? | Yes. |
2. | Whether Opposite Party is guilty of providing deficiency in service ? | Yes. |
3. | Whether action of forfeiting term fees and admission fees by Opposite Party on account of cancellation of admission prior to commencement of academic year is an unfair Trade Practice ? | Yes. |
4. | Whether the Complainants are entitled to get refund of admission fees and term fees alongwith interest from the Opposite Party ? | Yes. |
5. | Whether the Complainants are entitled to claim compensation and costs of litigation? | Partly yes. |
6. | What Order? | As per final order. |
Analysis of the facts
11) We have perused all the records available in the file and verified the facts in the case. It is observed that the Opposite Party failed to appear before this Commission to defend the case and therefore, there is no document filed on record which can suggest that the forfeiture of remaining amount of the fees paid by the Complainants is legitimate and correct as per the mutually agreed terms. Further, there is nothing on record to show that the Opposite Party had to keep seat vacant because of the cancellation of admission of the Complainant’s daughter.
12) The Complainants had informed the school in first week of March-2022 itself and the academic year begins only in the 3rdweek of July-2022, therefore, BIS had four (4) months to fill the vacant seat.
13) The Complainants referred the case of Hon'ble National Commission in Andhra University vs. Janjanam Jagedeesh, 2010 SCC OnLine NCDRC 181 in which it is held that while deciding the issue of non-refund of fees when the student withdraws from the institution, the Opposite Parties-Institute was unfair in retaining the entire fee, even after the student withdrew from their College.
14) Further, in the case of Birla Institute of Technology & Science and Ors. Vs. Abhishek Mengi (2013) SCC online NCDRC 394, it is held that an educational institute cannot forfeit the fees of student without disseminating education and any such forfeiture pursuant to any contract is void.
Conclusions and Findings
15) Based on above observations and analysis of facts, we are of the firm opinion that the Complainants are the consumers of the Opposite Party since they have paid fees as consideration amount and the forfeiture of fees by the BIS on account of cancellation of admission is unjustified which is clear case of using unfair trade practice adopted by the Opposite Party towards the outgoing students. The referred case laws are self-explanatory, relevant and hence, squarely applicable to the facts of this case.
16) Based on above analysis and findings, we are of the firm opinion that the Opposite Party has no legal right to forfeit the term fees and admission fees paid by the Complainants, as the admission was cancelled before the commencement of the academic year. The Complainants had informed the Opposite Party well in advance about his decision to cancel the admission of his daughter and he is entitle to get the entire amount of admission fees and term fees. Forfeiture of term fees and admission fees without any justifiable reason is definitely an unfair trade practice towards the Complainants, who had informed the school authorities well in advance. The Opposite Party is also guilty of deficiency of service for the said act. Hence, the Complainants are eligible to get interest on the amount of fees to be refunded and also entitle to claim compensation for mental agony with legal expenses from the Opposite Party for their act of resorting forfeiture of admission fees and term fees for the academic year which was yet to start.
18) On the basis of above findings, we held that the said complaint is genuine and deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order.
FINAL ORDER
1. The Consumer Complaint No.CC/204/2022 is hereby partly allowed.
2. The Opposite Party is hereby directed to refund the admission fees of Rs.1,00,000/- and term fees of Rs.4,82,550/- along with interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of admission cancellation request by the Complainants i.e, from 02/03/2022 till the actual payment to the Complainants, within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order.
3. If in case, the Opposite Party fails to pay the amount mentioned in above Clause 2 of this order within 45 days as specified, they will have to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from 02/03/2022 till actual payment to the Complainants.
4. The Opposite Party is found guilty of unfair trade practice as well as deficiency of service and for this, the Opposite Party is directed to pay compensation to pay Rs.50,000/- towards mental and physical discomfort to the Complainants.
5. The Opposite Party is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the Complainants towards legal expenses.
6. The copy of this order be sent to both the parties free of costs.
