BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 167/2016 Filed on 01.04.2016

ORDER DATED: 31.01.2017

Complainants:

1. Soumya Soman. S, Thanniyam Kattaikkal, Vittiyam, Peyad P.O, Thiruvananthapuram-695 573.
2. Shylaja Soman. S,     ..do..                     ..do..

                                       (Party in person)

Opposite parties:

1. Managing Director, Imet Institute for Technical Studies, 1^st Floor, Family Shopping Centre, Kunnumpuram, Thiruvananthapuram-1.

2. Chairman, Imet Institute for Technical Studies, 1^st Floor, Family Shopping Centre, Kunnumpuram, Thiruvananthapuram-1.

      (By Adv. P.M. Idicula Mathai)

This C.C having been heard on 23.12.2016, the Forum on 31.01.2017 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. R. SATHI:  MEMBER

The case of the complainants is that the 1^st complainant has taken admission in the opposite party’s institute on 13.06.2012 for B.Sc airport management course.  She paid tuition fee, payment for uniform etc.  She also paid Rs. 50,000/- for job.  The opposite parties asked for a total amount of Rs. 2,95,000/- at the time of admission towards exam fee and training fee.  But later the complainant was forced to pay more money on different heads.  The 1^st complainant was sent to Hyderabad and Delhi for job.  But she did not get any job there and come back to Trivandrum for continuing studies.  Moreover complainant was unable to write examination for the first year because the institution has no affiliation.  She wrote the examination on 2013 through I.A.M.T.  In 2014 July also she pad examination fees, but she came to know that the opposite party’s institution did not remit the fee.  So the 1^st complainant taken admission in I.A.M.T on 22.02.2015 and she wrote her second year examination.  Hence the 1^st complainant and her mother 2^nd complainant approached this Forum for directing the opposite parties to refund Rs. 3 lakhs spent by them along with compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs. 

Notice was issued to the opposite parties in their new address and they accepted notice.  The opposite parties filed vakalath, but no version has been filed.  Hence the opposite parties are set exparte.  

Complainant filed affidavit in lieu of chief and marked Exts. P1 to P4. 

Issues:

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on opposite party’s side?
2. Whether the complainant is eligible for any reliefs as sought for?

Issues (i) & (ii):- The case of the complainants is that the 1^st complainant joined the opposite party institution on 13.06.2012 for B.Sc Airport Management course and remitted fees on different heads and receipts are marked as Ext. P1 series. The opposite parties also accepted more money without issuing receipts for job.  The 1^st complainant was also lost her one academic year due to affiliation problem and was not able to attend the examinations.  She wrote examination next year and passed, but did not get her mark list.  Later her parents take admission in IAMT on 22.02.2015 for her.  Here the opposite party filed vakalath, but failed to file version even after getting ample opportunity.  The opposite parties also did not file any contra evidence against the complainant and hence the evidence produced by the complainant stands unchallenged.  As per Ext. P1 series complainants remitted Rs. 1,45,000/- and according to the 1^st complainant she was not able to attend the examinations due to opposite party’s fault.  There is no other evidence from complainants’ side to show the other expenses incurred as stated in her statements.  Even though the complainants produce Ext. P2 e-ticket, the purpose of journey by the complainants and the role of opposite parties was not proved.  Thus on going through the evidence, we are of the opinion that there is unfair trade practice on opposite parties’ side and are liable for that.  Therefore, complaint is partly allowed by directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to refund Rs. 1,45,000/-, the amount paid by the complainants as per Ext. P1 series along with cost of Rs. 2,000/-. 

In the result, complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs. 1,45,000/-to the complainants as per Ext. P1 series along with cost of Rs. 2,000/- within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing with the amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- shall carry interest @ 12% from the date of default till payment along with cost of Rs. 2,000/-.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

 Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 31^st day of January 2017.      

     Sd/-

R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

      Sd/-

P. SUDHIR                            : PRESIDENT

      Sd/-

                                                                        LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 167/2016       

APPENDIX

  I      COMPLAINANT’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 II      COMPLAINANT’S DOCUMENTS:

P1 (series) - Copy of receipts issued by opposite party (5 Nos.)

P2         - Copy of e-ticket dated 29.11.2012

P3     - copy of challan for Rs. 3,430/-

P4     - Copy of document showing description of fees

III      OPPOSITE PARTY’S WITNESS:

                             NIL

 IV     OPPOSITE PARTY’S DOCUMENTS:

NIL 

                                                                                                      Sd/-

PRESIDENT

jb