Sri. George Baby (President):

          The complainant has filed this petition u/s.12 of the C.P. Act 1986 for getting a relief from the opposite parties.

                   2. The complainant case in brief as follows:-That the complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties. The opposite parties are the educational institution.  The 2^nd opposite party who is the Director of the 1^st opposite party offered the complainant high standard of employment by providing higher and excellent education. The 2^nd opposite party approached the complainant’s parents at their residence at Puranmattom, Vennikkulam and persuadedthe complainant to join CIMA SG 2015 course and accordingly the complainant joined the said course on payment of Rs.2,28,122/- to opposite parties as course fees and allied expenses.  After a short while thecomplainantrealised that there is no such facility or infrastructure in the course as offered by the opposite parties.  On 24/11/2017 as per the advice of the 2^ndopposite party the complainant applied for retreat from the course an completed the course in his own effort.  The entire future of the complainant has been lost only as the deficiency in service rendered by the opposite parties.  The complainant suffered monetary loss and mental agony arising out of the deceptive method adopted by the opposite parties.  In the said circumstances the complainant approached this Forum for the return of Rs. 2,28,122/- from the opposite parties.  The complainant issued legal notice to the opposite parties.  On 07/04/2018 demanding the payment of Rs. 2,28,122/- along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the mental agony and sufferings.  The opposite parties were accepted the notice on 10/04/2018.

3. This Forum entertained the complaint and issued notice to the opposite parties for their appearance.  But none of the opposite parties appeared before the Forum for contesting the matter and in due course all of them were declared ex-parte.

4. In this case, we framed the following issues for consideration.

(1). Whether the complaint is maintainable before this Forum?

(2). Whether the opposite party had committed any deficiency in   

service against the complainant? 

(3). Regarding the relief and cost? 

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant the complainant filed proof affidavit and marked as Exhibit A1 to A3.  A1 series are containing four bills issued by the opposite parties in favour of the complainant in different dates.  Ext. A2 is the copy of the lawyers notice dated: 07/04/2018 to the opposite parties.  Ext. A3 is the acknowledgement cards conveyingthe acceptance of legal notice.  After the closure of evidence we heard the complainant. 
6. Point No.1&2:-For the sake of convenience we would like to consider Point No. 1 &2 together.  According to the complainant he has joined CIMA SG 2015 course as per the direction and persuasion of 2^nd opposite party.  Who made such direction at this complainant’s residence at Puramattom.The complainant has paid Rs. 2,28,122/- to the opposite parties as course fee and allied expenses and same is proved through Exhibit A1 series of receipts.  But the complainant realised that there is no facility in opposite parties institution as they stated earlier.  Therefore as per the advice of the 2^nd opposite party the complainant retreat from the course and completed his course in his own effort.  The entire future of the complainant becomeperished only on the deficiency of service committed by the opposite parties.  The complainant suffered mental agony arising out of the deceptive methods adopted by the opposite parties. 
7. The complainant sent legal notice to opposite parties and they accepted the legal notice properly but not acted as per the demand of the legal notice.  In this case the opposite parties set ex-parte and evidence adduced by the complainant is unchallengeable.  When we evaluate the evidence before us it is found that the complainant proved his case successfully and as per the available evidence before us we can see that the opposite parties are jointly and severely liable to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is allowable.  Point No.1&2 are also found in favour of the complainant. 
8. In the result we pass the following orders:

1. The opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs. 2,28,122/- (Rupees Two lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand one Hundred and Twenty Two only) to the complainant with 10% interest within one month from the date of receipt of this order for the deficiency in service gross negligence and imperfections committed by them. 
2. The opposite parties are directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) for the mental agony and distress caused to this complainant.
3. It is further order that the opposite parties  him to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/-

(Rupees Three Thousand only) as cost to complainant.

         Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 31^stday of October, 2019. (

                                                                                (Sd/-)

Sri. George Baby

(President)

Smt. ShajithaBeevi.N(Member):        (Sd/-)

Appendix:

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:Nil.

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:

A1:  Four bills issued by the opposite parties in favour of the complainant.

A2:  Copy of the lawyers notice dated: 07/04/2018.

A3:  Acknowledgement cards.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties: Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties: Nil.

Copy to:- (1) Ajun George Varghese,

          Valiyangilickal House, Kavungumprayar P.O,

Puramattom, Vennikulam – 689 543.

2. Indian School of Commerce(ISC),

Nirmal, Infopark P.O, Kakkanad, Kochi – 682 042.

3. Mr. T.N. Prasad,

Director, Administration, ISC, Nirmal, Infopark P.O,

Kakkanad, Kochi – 682 042.

4. Mr. SanalSamaran,

Administration Manager,Indian School of Commerce,

NirmalInfopark P.O, Kakkanad, Kochi -682042.

5. The Stock File.