BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM.
KAMRUP
C.C.No.44/2016
Present: I) Shri A.F.A.Bora, M.Sc.,L.L.B.,A.J.S -President
II) Smti Archana Deka Lahkar,B.Sc.,L.L.B. -Member
III) Sri Jamatul Islam,B.Sc,Former Dy
Director, FCS & CA - Member
Mr.Yumlembam Bonny - Complainant
S/0 Late Yumlembam Gopendro
R/O-Wangkhei, Yumlembam Leikei.
Imphal East-795001, Manipur,
Presently residing at
C/O –Mrs.Pratima Sarma,
2 No. Ananda Nagar, Shiv Mandir,
House No.40, Noonmari,
Guwahati-20,
District: Kamrup,(Metro) Assam
-vs-
I) Head Office, NIIT Ltd. -Respondent/Opposite parties
85, Sector, Gurgaon- 122001
II) Division Office, NIIT Ltd.
House No. C-125, Okhla, Ph-1
Dew Delhi- 110020
III) Sri Raman Jha , Director,
NIIT Ltd.Noonmati Centre,
Basanta Enclave, 2nd Floor, Ulubari,
B.Baruah Road, Guwahati-07
District –Kamrup,(Metro) , Assam
IV) Sri Subhash Biswas
Centre Administrator,
NIIT, Noonmati Centre,
R/O- VIP Road, Magzine
Near Namghar P.O.Noonmati
Guwahati-26
District –Kamrup,(Metro) , Assam
Appearance
Learned advocate Mr.Nirmal Sarmah, Miss Hemajyoti Devi for the complainant .
Learned advocate Mr. Subham Das for the opposite parties/ Respondent.
Date of filing written argument:- 20.09. 18, 5.10. 18 and 19.6.20
Date of judgment: -12.11 .2020
JUDGMENT
1) This is a complaint u/s 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by one Yumlembam Bonny, Ananda Nagar, Shiv Mandir, Noonmati, Guwahati-20, against Opp.party No.(1) Head Office, NIIT Ltd. 85, Sector, Gurgaon- 122001, Opp.party No.(2) Division Office, NIIT Ltd. House No. C-125, Okhla, Ph-1, Dew Delhi- 110020 , Opp.party No.(3) Sri Raman Jha , Director, NIIT Ltd. Noonmati Centre, Basanta Enclave, 2nd Floor, Ulubari, B.Baruah Road, Guwahati-07, District -Kamrup,(Metro) , Assam and Opp.party No.(4) Sri Subhash Biswas, Centre Administrator, NIIT, Noonmati Centre, R/O- VIP Road, Magzine, Near Namghar P.O.Noonmati, Guwahati-26, District –Kamrup,(Metro) , Assam. The complainant being a student of Imphal , Manipur residing at Noonmati , Guwahati under care of Mrs.Pratima Sarma, . Ananda Nagar, Shiv Mandir, House No.40, Noonmari, Guwahati-20, District: Kamrup, (Metro) Assam lodged present complaint against the above named opp.parties .
2) According to the complainant he got advertisement in respect of aforesaid course under the NIIT Ltd with assurance of 100% job guarantee as per their prospectors by the respondent No.1 through respondent no. 3 .
3) The complainant on 15.11.2011 took admission in the institution of NIIT, Noonmati centre, Guwahati in the course of GNIIT (Respondent/opp.party No. 3).
4) Accordingly , the complainant got his student ID No. S121143600119 and registration No. R. 121143600137, Batch Code B 120009 and deposited Rs. 50,000/- in two installments in the year 2011.
5) The complainant submits that the course was consists of 6 (six) semesters. Out of which four semester for course of GNIIT and after completion of GNIIT two additional i.e. 5th and 6th semester is to be conducted by the aforesaid additional institution for the course of B.Sc., IT.
6) The classes in respect of 1st semester were conducted by the Respondent/opp.party No. 3 at Royal Regency, Near Guwahati College Bus stoppage , Guwahati-21 in the year 2012 and study materials were supplied by the concerned authority after 9 months of the 1st semester.
7) The complainant beg to state that as per their schedule mentioned in the prospector completed within 31.12.2014 (within the 3 years) and respondent No. 3 & 4 are bound to provide all educational materials and study materials in respect of the aforesaid course for all 6th semester in proper time as well as conduct of the examination without delay.
8) According to the complainant, the time of the aforesaid course as per the schedule 2 pm to 4 pm for three days in a week and the subject for 1st semester C Language introduction of Computer Operating System and C #. The course of the 2nd Semester C++, Data structure , and Algorithms, Data base application, development using ADO, Net and XML, GUI ( as technical subjects ) .
9) As per the schedule the Respondent/opp.party have assured to conduct the examination timely after six months in semester wise. But the Respondent/opp.party conducted only 1st semester after 11 months from the date of admission.
10) It is alleged that complainant had lost most of the valuable time for prospective future life with the fault and negligence of the said educational institute and for fault of the respondents. It is alleged that Respondent/opp.party have spoiled the valuable time of the complainant without any reasonable ground.
11) It is alleged that complainant have paid fees regularly on demand. It is alleged that on 18.6.12 complainant have paid Rs.6,523/- for the 2nd semester , but the study materials and other materials received very lately for the month of October , 2012, and the complainant received only 2 books C ++, Data Base structure and Algorithms for the 2nd semester and remaining other study materials were dispatched by the respondent after 8 months i.e. after June 2013.
12) Under the above circumstances the complainant on 22.12.2012 sent a complaint on mail to the Respondent/opp.party and Respondent/opp.party on 24.12.12 sent an e.mail to the complainant to contact Miss Sangita Nandan, Regional Education Delivery Head. But no response was received. The complainant have sent request to respondent/opp.party No. 3 & 4 regarding non-furnishing study materials; but they have only assured issuing that materials will come very shortly.
13) Under the above circumstances complainant suffered in continuing his study and in the month of November , 2014 Respondent/opp.party No. 3 & 4 suggested the complainant to continue his study in other private institution without consulting with Respondent/opp.party No. 1 & 2 and have failed to provide the information of other institution . Again the complainant wrote a complaint regarding status of the student at www.niit.com. The complainant also sent his request in the e.mail address cgrsho @ niit.com. The complainant stated that on 31.7.2013 the complainant sent a mail to the Respondent regarding the date of examination for the 2nd semester on 19.8.2013. The opposite party has sent a mail on 19.8.13 to the e.mail address to the complainant to contact Suman Paul Choudhury for finalizing examination date for 2nd semester. But the said person also failed to give any information regarding examination date etc.
14) Under the above circumstances complainant on 18.4.2014 sent a legal notice through his advocate to respondent No.3 & 4, but they failed to take any response in the matter. Ultimately, the complainant requested the opp.party to provide a certificate in respect of completion of 1st semester and on 17.3.15 the respondent No. 4 issued a certificate in the name of the complainant as “To whom it may concern”.
15) It is alleged that complainant have paid an expenditure of Rs.1,01,706/- against the aforesaid course in the installment basis. Accordingly, the Respondent No. 3 has issued money receipts against the aforesaid instalment. It is alleged that complainant have suffered mentally and physically and have loss his future prospective and damages during his student life which was assessed to an amount of Rs.18,00,000/-.
16) The cause of action arose on 15.11.2011 when the complainant took admission and thereafter on 22.12.12 , 24.12.12 and on 31.7.13 and also for non-receipt of study material etc. on 19.8.13 and 18.4.14 the complainant sent a legal notice through his advocate to opp.party No. 3 and also on 17.3.15 on opp.party No. 4 to provide a certificate to the complainant . Having such allegation compensation claim has been made Rs.18,00,000 along with cost of the proceeding and other reliefs etc.
17) The Respondent/opp.party No.1 & 2 contested the proceeding by filing written statement whereas the opp.party No.3 & 4 have not appeared and the claim is proceeded exparte against the Respondent/opp.party No. 3 & 4. The contesting Respondent/opp.party claims that complaint is barred by limitation . The complainant did not complete the GNIIT course and became fee defaulter. Thus, there was no deficiency in service on their part. It is submitted that complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties with which the complainant took admission in GNIIT course and paid the fee. In absence of the necessary parties , no effective order can be passed in the matter.
18) Respondent/opp.party No.1 & 2 pleaded that the documents are forged and fabricated documents and no such documents were issued by them . The course fees are paid directly to the Licensee/centre and not to NIIT Ltd. (Respondent No.1 & 2). The Respondent No.1 & 2 denied that any complaint was made regarding certificate and the alleged certificate dated 17/3/2015 is disputed . The Respondent No. 4 has no authority to issue any certificate for completion. Only NIIT Ltd. can issue the certificate for completion and not anybody else. The said certificate is not valid in the eye of law. It is further alleged that fee receipts are forged and fabricated and denied of the claim by the complainant.
Issues for consideration
19) The following issues are taken for consideration and just discussion of the dispute .
Issue No. I:- Whether the document submitted by the complainant are forged and fabricated ?
Issue No. II :- Whether the Respondents are liable for deficiency of service ?
Issue No. III :- Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation if so to what extent ?
20) Issue No. I:- On perusal of the record we have found that the complainant got an advertisement in respect of a course under the NIIT Ltd. with assurance of 100% job as per their prospectus by the Respondent No. 1 through Respondent No. 3 and accordingly the complainant became a student under the said Respondents by taking admission etc. The Respondents are bound to provide all study materials of the entire course as well as conduct of the examination as per their schedule . Later on, the complainant found that the Respondent were negligent in their service by not providing all study materials, as well as not conducting the examination in schedule time and therefore, complainant under the above circumstances finding no other way approached the Forum by filing this complaint .
21) We have found that the complainant took admission on 15.11.2011 in the institute of the Respondent. As per the schedule of the Respondents course was to be completed within 31.12.2014 i.e. within 3 (three ) years . The complainant placed his grievances before the Respondents by sending mail on 22.12.2012 and 31.07.2013 . The complainant got a personal certificate on 17.3.2015 from the Respondent No. 4 .
22) Here, we have consider the oral testimony of C.W.1 who have with clear language claimed that he got admission on NIIT, Noonmati Centre, Guwahati -21 ,Assam. He had submitted 5 no.s of documents vide Ex.1 to Ex. 5 and during cross –examination the opp.party have not put a word to the complainant referring the documents as forged and fabricated. If the opp.party is of view that these documents are not issued by them then they could have very easily rebutted the same by putting at least suggestion to that effect which have not done by the Respondents during cross-examination of C.W.1. As such, a plea taken by the opp.party at a later stage that documents obtained by the claimant are false and fabricated cannot be accepted without any evidence to that effect.
23) Moreover, we have also found that Respondent No. 1 and 2 did not file any complaint /FIR before the concerned authorities regarding forgery of the said documents. Forgery is a serious criminal offence and if anybody is involved in such crimes/ misleads anybody by enclosing forged documents immediately action should be initiated against the person who is involved in forgery. But in this case Respondent No. 1 & 2 did nothing although they could have initiated a criminal case against the forgery of documents . Simply stating in the written statement that the enclosed documents of the complaint are forged is not sufficient to disprove the complaint of the complainant.
24) The evidence of O.P.W. 1 represented by Sri Benu Gopal K. is very clear that NIIT Ltd. is a process driven organization and wherein process are prescribed for each of the activity. NIIT Ltd. had implemented an Online Student Management System called ENCORE and all enforcement from registration of a student till his certification is entered into ENCORE . It is categorically mentioned that there was an agreement between the NIIT with M/s Swastika Haswal Telecom Services Pvt.Ltd. and the copy of the license agreement entered by the NIIT is exhibited wherefrom it has been made clear that opp.party No. 1 the licensee will be entitled to collect and receive course fees including Coursewise Fee, Administration Fee, Tution Fee, Career Development Services Fee, Transfer Fee, , Inter-Centre Transfer Fee, Admission Status Change Fee, Statue of Limitation Extension Fee, Prospectus fee, advances and deposits . The Licensee shall issue receipts to the students only in the Licensors’ approved format clearly showing the Licensees’ status as a Licensee.
25) However, it is not a dispute in the matter to determine where Respondent was a licensee having some agreement with some other organization . Main dispute before us is whether they have provided the service to the complainant and what were the deficiency in their service to the complainant. O.P.W.1 have submitted the questionnaire in the form of reply where he had duly admitted that ID No. was issued in the name of the complainant for pursuing in GNIIT. According to him ID No. was duly proved by the Head office of the NIIT Ltd. This witness have however admitted that money receipt vide Ex.III to Ex.XVIII were referred to him and he stated that an amount of Rs.55,606/- were entered into the centralized recording system which was maintained by Respondent No. 1 & 2 and the receipt attached by the complainant are forged and fabricated receipts. According to him , complainant had not made any payment after first semester and become a defaulter. The course completed certificate i.e. Ex.5 is disputed and this witness claimed that Respondent No. 4 had no authority to issue such certificate and according to the opp.pary No.1 the certificate is not a valid one.
26) From the question put to the witness it is clear that licensee is responsible for holding examination and the supply of course materials were issued as per clause 4.1 of the NIIT agreement. Again in a question to OPW 1 answered that as per agreement the licensee is bound to right its relationship with NIIT Ltd. in documents which is issuing to the students . It is very clear from the cross examination of OPW 1 that Respondent No. 1 & 2 are not agent or legal representative or partner of the Respondent No. 3 & 4.
27) After due consideration of the evidence on record we are not in a position to comment on the documents that those are not genuine or forged. It is the responsibility of the opp.party to prove that these documents are not genuine or not issued by them if they claim so. There was a long period of communication between the complainant and the opp.party No.1 & 2 in respect of the dispute and contesting opp.party claimed that documents were forged and fabricated . They could have very easily taken up legal action against them which they have not done . As such merely denying the documents at a later stage cannot be taken in favour of the contesting opp.party.
28) In the result , we are of the opinion that documents submitted by the complainant along with his registration number are not forged and fabricated and accordingly this issue is decided in favour of the complainant.
29) Issue No. II:- Respondent No. 1 & 2 have fully known the information that the head office of NIIT Ltd. have the authority to collect the course fee and accordingly Respondent No. 3 had collected course fee from the complainant. The complainant in his evidence stated that on 17.3.2015 the Respondent No. 4 has provided a personal certificate in the name of complainant for completion of 2 years of course . The said certificate is claimed to be false , fabricated and baseless due to without conducting examination of 3rd and 4th semester.
30) Here, we were of view that if such certificate was issued, the op.party No. 1 & 2 could have taken appropriate step in time which they have not done.
31) It is admitted position in the matter that complainant took admission under NIIT after getting the advertisement of Respondent No.1 through Respondent/opp.party No. 3 with a pre-conceived mind of job guarantee which was assured by the Respondent No.1. The Respondent No.1 is the head office of NIIT Ltd. and Respondent No.2 is the division office of NIIT. The complainant was taking admission of NIIT got his student ID No. S121143600119. According to Respondent/opp.party 1 & 2 as per Student Information Service maintained by NIIT Ltd / Licensee the complainant took admission in GNIIT course with the Respondent on 15.11.2011 with registration No. R. 121143600137 and it is admitted by the contesting opp.party that complainant was issued with ID for GNIIT course which was provided to them by head office of NIIT Ltd.
32) So far discussion made in the earlier issue it is very clear that opp.party No.1 & 2 are responsible for providing study materials and also responsible for timely conduct of the examination as per schedule declared. 33) Here , we have found that instead of conducting examination and proper reading materials to the complainant , one of the opp.party i.e. opp.party No. 4 have issued a completion certificate which is on the other hand claimed by one of the contesting opp.party that he had no authority to issue the same. It is also admitted fact that opp.party No. 1 & 2 have received an amount of Rs.55,606/- from the complainant. On the other hand claimant submits that out of 6 semesters the opp.party no. 3 conducted 1st semester in the year 2012 and study materials were supplied to the complainant after 9 months of the 1st semester.
34) In this way it is found that there is a gross negligence and irregularity on the part of the respondents in providing course curriculum to the student as assured in their prospectus . The due ID No. was issued to the complainant as a student and as such all the four respondents are jointly and severally liable for negligent on their part in providing course materials as well as conducting regular semester examination.
35) Respondent/opp.party advising the complainant to go for another course in the midway is not at all desirable and responsible activity of the respondents. Here, we found that all the respondents are negligent in dealing with a prospecting student who was joining the institution with a pre-conceived mind of job guarantee . Hence , there is a deficiency of service to the complainant by all the four opp.parties and accordingly this issue is decided in favour of the complainant.
36) In the result issue No. 3 is decided in favour of the complainant and our considered view regarding the amount of compensation is that a student who is supposed to be guided by the responsible teachers and other faculties has been misguided putting into a difficulty to the extent of uncertainity what to do and what not to do. It is clearly admitted by the opp.party that they have received Rs. 55,606/- from the complainant, but they could not have given explanation about the payment of fees for the second semester amounting to Rs.6,523/- and the claim of the complainant about his expenditure incurred in the course amounting to Rs.1,01,706/-. But the payment of installment cannot be rebutted by the opp.party by establishing sufficient evidence . Hence we are of the opinion that the aforesaid amount paid by the complainant is need to be refunded back by the opp.parties.
37) The compensation claimed for mental and physical harassment and loss of future prospective and damage caused is definitely high. But however, we have considered all aspects of the matter including the administrative and other deficiency of the opp.party. In our considered view, amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- along with cost of the proceeding amounting to Rs.30,000/- need to be paid to the complainant by all the opp.parties . The opp.parties are jointly and severally liable to make the payment within 45 days from the date of judgment failing which opp.party have to pay interest @ 12% for the awarded amount from the date of judgment till realization.
38) In the result, suit is decreed in favour of the complainant providing a total compensation of Rs. 3,00000 + Rs.30,000 + Rs.1,01706 in total Rs.4,31,706/- (Rupees four lakhs thirty one thousand seven hundred six)only.
Given under our hand and seal of the District Forum, Kamrup, this the 12th day of November, 2020.
Member Member President
DCF,Kamrup DCF,Kamrup DCF,Kamrup
