Complainant Pankaj Kumar Dadwal has filed the present complaint against the opposite parties U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (for short, C.P.Act.) seeking necessary directions to opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to his damages which include institute fee of Rs.6500/- paid by him and instability caused to mental health and other financial expenses.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that he has deposited Rs.6500/- to opposite party Grey Matters Gurdaspur on 31.12.2021 as an extention to his course. It is alleged by complainant that he was aspirant of IELTS and attended four weeks out of eight weeks course. It is further pleaded that due to imposition of lockdown of January 2022 the classes were closed at least for a month. He went to opposite party on 22.1.2022  and asked for refund of fees paid but co-ordinator Ms.Navjeevan Kaur straightway refused to refund the fee and she also refused to give the contact number of Area Manager of Institute. Complainant further added that he had conveyed opposite party to move to Consumer Court but even then opposite party has harassed him. He appeared in IELTS exam on 5.2.2022 and alleged that he could not score in good exam due to harassment caused by the Institute. Complainant further pleaded that he was not informed by opposite party for classes which were held by them for students to appear for exams. Moreover no study material was given by opposite party. It is also alleged by complainant that he could not take September in take for abroad study due to misacts of opposite party as alleged by complainant. He has also lodged complaint with District Collector and at National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's helpline numbers against the opposite party as the opposite party failed to redress the grievance of the complainant. Hence this complaint.

 3.          Notice issued to opposite party had been received back with the report of 'Refusal. Refused report of service conveys that opposite party  had been served but it was intentionally evading the service of the notice. Case called several times, but none had appeared on behalf of opposite party  Hence, opposite party was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order 29.6.2022.

4.      Alongwith the complaint, complainant has filed his own affidavit Ex.CW-1/A alongwith other documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-3.

5.      We have carefully gone through the pleadings of counsel for the complainant; oral arguments advanced by their respective counsel and have also appreciated the evidence produced on record with the valuable assistance of the learned counsel for the complainant for the purposes of adjudication of the present complaint.

6.       In the present complaint, the complainant paid Rs.6500/- as fee for IELTS from opposite party and placed on record the receipt at Ex.C-1. As alleged by complainant in the complaint and in affidavit also, he has neither attended classes due to lockdown nor any study material is received by him. Inspite of his best efforts, opposite party has not made the refund of the fee deposited by him. It is also mentioned by complainant that he himself appeared in the exam but could not get good score due to non co-operative behavior of opposite party, thereby deprived off the intake for abroad study.

7.    From the evidential part, it is proved that the complainant time and again approached opposite party for removal of her grievance but was unnecessarily harassed by opposite party which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. The opposite party did not bother to appear in the Commission and prefer to proceed exparte vide order dated 29.06.2022 and also failed to satisfy the complainant and also did not care to contest the claim of the complainant and rebut the evidence led by her as aforesaid and as such it can be concluded without any hesitation that either opposite party admit the claim of the complainant or has nothing to say in the matter. In this way, the evidence led by the complainant goes unrebutted and unassailed.

8.    From the above facts of the case, we are of the considered view that complainant has suffered due to antipathetic attitude of the opposite party inspite of the fact that it was related to the future of a student. Moreover the complainant has not availed any service for the amount paid to opposite party. Hence denial to provide any service and refund of the amount paid is clearly the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

9.      In view of the aforesaid discussion, we partly allow the complaint and opposite party is hereby directed to refund Rs.6500/- paid by the complainant within 30 days of receipt of copy of orders. Further opposite party is directed to pay Rs.10,000/- in lumpsum for mental harassment and inconvenience to the complainant.

10.        The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

11.    Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.                                                                                                                                                         

            (Naveen Puri)

                                                                            President   

Announced:                                                   (B.S.Matharu)

August 05, 2022                                                  Member

*MK*