Kerala

Idukki

CC/122/2017

Alan Varghese - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mathew Trainer - Opp.Party(s)

27 Feb 2018

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
IDUKKI
 
Complaint Case No. CC/122/2017
( Date of Filing : 20 Jun 2017 )
 
1. Alan Varghese
valipoykayil house,mariyapuram p o
IDUKKI
KERALA
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Mathew Trainer
POC Recuitment camp kattappana
IDUKKI
KERALA
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. S Gopakumar PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Benny K MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 27 Feb 2018
Final Order / Judgement

DATE OF FILING : 20.6.2017

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 27th day of February, 2018

Present :

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR PRESIDENT

SRI. BENNY. K. MEMBER

CC NO.122/2017

Between

Complainant : Alen Varghese,

Valliyampoikayil House,

Mariyapuram P.O.,

Madathumkadu, Idukki.

And

Opposite Parties : 1. Mathew (Trainer),

Battalion Pre-recruitment

Training Camp,

Kattappana – Puliyanmala Road,

Opp. IDC Bank,

Kattappana.

2. The Managing Director,

Battalion Training Institute,

Palappallil Building,

Near Nattuvathukkal Market,

Memana Valiyakulangara,

Ochira P.O., Kollam – 690 526.

O R D E R

 

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR, PRESIDENT

 

Case of the complainant is that,

 

Complainant paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the 1st opposite party as the 1st instalment and admission fee for a pre-recruitment training conducted by 1st opposite party. For payment of fees, 1st opposite party issued a receipt as No.B2504, from its Kattappana Branch office.

 

When there was no coaching classes as offered by 1st opposite party, complainant applied for refund of fees, by complying all formalities as stipulated by 1st opposite party on 25.5.2017. But there was no response from the part of 1st opposite party eventhough complainant contacted him so many times. Hence alleging deficiency in service against 1st opposite party, complainant filed a petition for getting back the said amount along with cost and compensation. (cont....2)

- 2 -

On notice, 1st opposite party entered appearance and filed detailed reply version. In his version, 1st opposite party contended that he was an in-charge of Battalion Pre-recruitment Centre and its head office is at Kottarakkara, in Kollam district. At the time of submitting application, the complainant was well aware of the rules and regulations of the institution and after knowing it fully, he signed the application and submitted it. Moreover, the receipt issued by the 1st opposite party to the complainant is specifically stated that the amount will not be refunded. Moreover, he himself withdrawn from the course for the reason that he got admission for MBA in Gujarath. Hence in no way, he is entitled to get the fee refunded as there is no deficiency in service from the part of 1st opposite party.

 

Eventhough notices are issued to additional 2nd opposite party, additional 2nd opposite party not turned up to content the matter. Hence additional 2nd opposite party set exparte.

 

Complainant filed proof affidavit and produced 2 documents and marked it as Exts.P1 and P2. Ext.P1 is the copy of receipt dated 2.5.2017. Ext.P2 is a CD.

 

Matter heard in detail.

 

The point that arose for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite parties and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to ?

 

The POINT :- We have heard both the counsels in detail and gone through the documents on record. On perusal of Ext.P3 and the version of the 1st opposite party, it is admitted that, the complainant himself withdrawn from the course for the reason that he got admission for MBA, in Gujarath. It is admitted by him through the Ext.P3 letter issued to the 1st opposite party for refund of the course fee. Also from the attendance register, we can see that the complainant was not attended any of the classes. Under the above said circumstances, complainant is not eligible to get any compensation or cost from the opposite party, except the fee remitted.

 

Under the above discussion, the Forum is of a considered view that 1st opposite party has not incurred any expenses for giving training to the complainant at least for one day and he is not entitled to keep the fee with him.

 

(cont....3)

- 3 -

 

Hence the Forum directs the 1st opposite party to refund an amount of Rs.10000/- to the complainant within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry 12% interest per annum from the date of default.

 

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 27th day of February, 2018

 

Sd/-

SRI. S. GOPAKUMAR, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

SRI. BENNY. K., MEMBER

 

 

 

APPENDIX

 

Depositions :

Nil.

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Copy of receipt dated 2.5.2017.

Ext.P2 - CD.

On the side of the Opposite Party :

Nil.

 

 

 

 

Forwarded by Order,

 

 

 

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. S Gopakumar]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Benny K]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.