Date of Filing:29.07.2022

Date of Disposal:11.04.2023

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BENGALURU

1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.

   ORDER

SRI RAMACHANDRA.M.S,  PRESIDENT

1. The complainant files a complaint with this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 with a direction to OP to refund admission fee Rs.86,000/- and Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony, stress and such other reliefs.

2.   The following are the complaint's key facts: 

The complainant with an intention to get admission of his twin kidsAhana and Aarav to the OP school situated at Hennur for nursery grade for the year 2022-2023 and he has applied foradmission and also filled admission form with the OP school and also paid admission fee and total of Rs.86,000/- towards admission of both kids to the OP school. On receiptof said amount the OPs have issued receipt for being received the said amount from the complainant.

3. It is further case of the complainant that the complainant is residing at Hennur and school of the OP is situated at 6 KMs away from his home. As the complainant’s kids are very young, since the complainant get another option near his home, where a new school which is very next to his home  at Hennur. Due to new school available very close to complainant’s home, the complainant  requested the OP management to refund the admission fee of Rs.86,000/- as there is admission available to the complainant’s kids in a nearby school to his home. The OP neither replied nor refunded the admission fee of Rs.86,000/- to the complainant despite of the best efforts of the complainant. When the OP has failed to respond the request of the complainant, the complainant was forced to file the present complaint sought for relief for refund of entire amount

4. Notice to OP duly served, by remaining absent they have placed ex-parte.

5.  The complainant filed chief-examination affidavit along with relevant in support of his contention.

6.  Heard arguments. The matter is reserved for order.

7.  The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the Complainant prove that there is deficiency of service on the part of the OPs as alleged in the complaint and thereby prove that he is entitle for the relief sought?
2. What order?

8. The findings on the above points are as under:

Point No.1                :       Affirmative

Point No.2                :       As per final order

REASONS

9. POINT NO.1:-  On perusal of the complaint, chief examination affidavit and by annexure  exhibits produced in the complaint, it is found that the complainant with an intention to get admission of his twin kids  Ahana and Aarav to the OP school situated at Hennur for nursery grade for the year 2022-2023 and he has applied for  admission and also filled admission form with the OP school and also paid admission fee total of Rs.86,000/- towards admission of both kids to the OP school. On receipt  of said amount the OP has also issued receipt for being received the said amount from the complainant.

10. It is the case of complainant that the complainant is residing at Hennur and school of the OP is situated at 6 KMs away from his home. As the complainant’s kids are very young, since the complainant get another option near his home, where a new school which is right next to his home  at Hennur. Since the  new school available very close to complainant’s home, the complainant  requested the OP management to refund the admission fee of Rs.86,000/- as there is admission available to the complainant’s kids in a nearby school to his home. The OP neither replied nor refunded the admission fee of Rs.86,000/- to the complainant despite of the best efforts of the complainant. When the OP has failed to respond the request of the complainant, the complainant was forced to file the present complaint sought for relief for refund of entire amount.

11. It is observed that the Hon’ble National consumer commission, New Delhi, in the case between Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual V/s Dr.Nishi Gupta, which is reported in CPR 2018(1) page 325. In this case the Hon’ble National commission held that “non filing of written version in the complaint which amounts to admission of complaint allegations”.

12. The guidelines of the above rule aptly applicable to the case as the OP by remaining absent, they have placed           ex-parte in the complaint. In the absence of the version, affidavit from their side what ever the complaint allegations is to be held as true facts. On this legal inference can be drawn in favour of the complainant as against OP, that there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP.

13. As per documents produced by the complainant in annexure-3,4,5 & 6, it is crystal clear that the complainant has paid a sum of Rs.86,000/- to the OP towards the admission of his kids to nursery grade and upon receipt of the same the OP has also issued a receipt for being received the said amount from the complainant. All these complainant allegations as against the OP is proved by the complainant with production of relevant documents in support of his plea. By considering the contentions of the complaint and also by examining the documents produced in support of the their pleading, the commission has no hesitation to held that the refusal of OP to refund the admission amounts deficiency of service. The act and action of the OP attracts deficiency of service on their part, for which they are  held liable to refund the said amount to the complainant along with other reliefs which is granted in the complaint.

14. In view of the above discussion, the Point No.1 we answer Partly in Affirmative.

15. POINT NO.2:- In the result, we passed the following:

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed in part.
2. The OP is directed to refund Rs.86,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of payment  till refund is made  to the complainant.
3. The OP further directed to pay a sum of  Rs.10,000/- as compensation for deficiency, Rs.5,000/- for pain and sufferings  and sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation charges. OP fails to comply the order within 45 days from the date of order, compensation amount and cost of litigation shall  carry interest at 6% p.a. for non-compliance of the order.

4. Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties. 

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Commission on 11^th April 2023)

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

       (NANDINI H KUMBHAR)             (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)       

                 MEMBER                                        MEMBER

Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit:

Sri Hemanth Jayarama-who being the complainant

Documents produced by the complainant:

Witness examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit: Nil

Documents produced by the OP: Nil

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)

         MEMBER                                     MEMBER

SKA*