Present : Sri. C.T. Sabu, President
Smt. Sreeja. S., Member
Sri. Ram Mohan R., Member
30th day of September 2022
CC 340/19 filed on 07/06/19
Complainant : Mukundan, S/o Perumbilly Narayanan Nair,
Mupliyam Village, Mupliyam P.O., Chalakkudy.
(By Advs. A.S. Santhoshkumar & R. Biji, Thrissur)
Opposite Parties : 1) SR Medical College,
SR Education & Charitable Trust,
Vennikkode P.O., Varkkala, Thiruvananthapuram,
Rep. by Chairman R.Shaji.
2) R. Shaji, Chairman, SR Education & Charitable Trust,
Varkkala, Thiruvananthapuram.
(Ex-parte)
O R D E R
By Sri. Ram Mohan R, Member :
- Complaint in brief, as averred :
The complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The complainant’s daughter Ms. Aiswarya K, who scored 406 for All India Medical Entrance Exam (NEET), secured admission for MBBS course in the 1st opposite party Medical College, in the spot admission held on 04/09/18. The 1st opposite party Medical College is run by SR Education and Charitable Trust of which the 2nd opposite party is the Chairman. The opposite parties statedly claimed to have all the required infrastructure for providing medical education at ‘State of Art’ academic standards. As per the instructions of the 1st opposite party, the complainant on 05/09/18 transferred to the bank account of the 1st opposite party, a sum of Rs.64,000/- towards admission fee and a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards tuition fee of his daughter, the total sum transferred being Rs.1,24,000/-. But on 05/09/18 itself, the Hon’ble Supreme court stayed the medical education admission proceedings of the opposite parties. Subsequently, the Hon’ble Apex Court totally invalidated the opposite parties’ admission proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court having invalidated the opposite parties medical education admission proceedings, the complainant sought for refund of the amount paid by him, by writing a letter to the opposite parties to that effect. The complainant argues that the Hon’ble Supreme Court had invalidated the admission proceedings of the opposite parties, solely for their own fault and hence he is entitled to a refund of the sum he paid. In spite of the complainant’s having repeatedly made several requests to that effect with the opposite parties, the opposite parties failed to refund the said sum of Rs.1,24,000/- to the complainant. Hence the complaint. The complainant prays for an order directing the opposite parties to refund the sum he paid, apart from other reliefs of compensation and costs.
2) NOTICE :
The Commission issued notices to the opposite parties. Though the notices were duly served, the opposite parties failed to enter appearance before the Commission or contest the complaint. Accordingly, the proceedings against the opposite parties were set ex-parte.
3)Evidence :
The complainant produced documental evidence that had been marked Exts. P1 to P6, apart from affidavits and notes of argument. The proceedings against the opposite parties being ex-parte, no evidence produced on their part.
4) Deliberation of evidence and facts of the case :
The Commission had scrupulously examined the facts and evidence of the case. Ext. P1 is the passbook issued in favour of the complainant from State Bank of India, Thrissur Round South, with A/C No. 67230792802. Ext. P2 is copy of the complainant’s letter dtd. 26/03/19, addressed to the 1st and the 2nd opposite parties seeking refund of the sum of Rs.1,24,000/- he paid. Ext. P3 is copy of the Slip issued by the opposite parties for the complainant’s transfer of money to the opposite parties, wherein the banking details of SR Educational & Charitable Trust are entered. Ext. P4 is copy of the letter dtd. 20/06/19 from the Chairman, Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee for Medical Education in Kerala, addressed to The Principal, SR Medical College and Research Centre, Varkkala, in response to a petition filed by the complainant. Ext. P5 is copy of the Memo with admission details, issued to Aiswarya K., by the Commissioner for Entrance Examination, Thiruvananthapuram. Ext. P6 comprises copies of Postal Receipts.
5) Points of deliberation :
(i) Whether the opposite parties’ act is tantamount to unfair trade
practice or whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of
the opposite parties ?
(ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to any compensation from
the opposite parties ? If so its quantum ?
(iii) Costs ?
6) Point No.(i)
The entry dated 05/09/18 in Ext. P1 Passbook evidences the transfer of a sum of Rs.1,24,000/- to Account No. 030613610496, which is indicated in the Ext. P3 slip, as well. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, we do not find any reason to disbelieve the contention of the complainant. Moreover the opposite parties have hardly cared to either appear or file their version before the Commission, in spite of their having received the Commission’s Notice to that effect. This recalcitrant and neglectful demeanour of the opposite parties unveils their blatant disregard to the process of law. The opposite parties conscious failure to file their written version before the Commission is tantamount to admission of the allegations levelled against them by the complainant. The Hon’ble National Commission expressed the same view in its order dtd. 09/10/17 in RP 579/2017 (2017 (4) CPR 590). It is a matter beyond doubt that imparting education for consideration falls well within the ambit of ‘service’ as defined under the Consumer Protection Act. This matter is further emphasised by the Hon’ble National Commission, in its order dtd.29/09/2000 in Bhupesh Khurana and others Vs Vishwa Buddha Parishad and others. The opposite parties’ act of not having imparted education to the complainant’s daughter, despite collecting the fees towards the same, is certainly deficiency in service on their part. Their further act of having not refunded the fees collected even in the wake of their failure to impart education to the complainant’s daughter constitutes unfair trade practice. The complainant is entitled to a refund of the entire sum he remitted with opposite parties towards the purpose of education of his daughter, ie Rs.1,24,000/-
7) Point No. (ii) & (iii)
The misdeeds on the part of the opposite parties inflicted financial loss, agony and hardship – both mental and physical on the complainant. The opposite parties have necessarily to compensate the complainant. We are of the considered view that the complainant is entitled to receive from the opposite parties a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the financial loss, agony hardship - both mental and physical, he underwent, and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards costs.
In the result, the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed to,
- refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.1,24,000/- (Rupees One lakh twenty four thousand only),
- pay the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) towards compensation for the financial loss agony and hardship he underwent, and
- a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards cost of litigation,
all with 9% interest p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of realisation. The opposite parties shall comply with the above directions within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Commission this the 30th day of September 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Sreeja S. Ram Mohan R C. T. Sabu
Member Member President
Appendix
Complainant’s Exhibits :
Ext. P1 passbook issued in favour of the complainant from State Bank of India,
Thrissur Round South, with A/C No. 67230792802.
Ext. P2 copy of the complainant’s letter dtd. 26/03/19, addressed to the 1st and
the 2nd opposite parties seeking refund of the sum of Rs.1,24,000/- he
paid.
Ext. P3 copy of the Slip issued by the opposite parties for the complainant’s
transfer of money to the opposite parties, wherein the banking details of
SR Educational & Charitable Trust are entered.
Ext. P4 copy of the letter dtd. 20/06/19 from the Chairman, Admission and Fee
Regulatory Committee for Medical Education in Kerala, addressed to
The Principal, SR Medical College and Research Centre, Varkkala, in
response to a petition filed by the complainant.
Ext. P5 copy of the Memo with admission details, issued to Aiswarya K., by the
Commissioner for Entrance Examination, Thiruvananthapuram.
Ext. P6 comprises copies of Postal Receipts.
Id/- Member
