Date of filing: 20.09.2018                                                    Date of Disposal: 05.05.2023

 BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,      BENGALURU – 560 027.

DATED THIS THE 05^th DAY OF MAY, 2023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 1553/2018

PRESENT:

SRI.RAJU K.S,

SMT.REKHA SAYANNAVAR,:MEMBER

         Ms. Chandana.S,

D/o. Shekar P,

Aged About 23 years,

R/at: No.268, 1^st Main,

Srinivasnagar Sunkadakatte,

Vishwaneedam Post,

(Rep. by Sri.A.Vijaya Sai, Advocate)

- V/s -

1) Sri Madukar Angur,

Chancellor,

2) Sri Sudhir G Angur,

3) The Executive PGDM,

Alliance University,

Alliance School of Business,

Chikkahagade Cross,

Chandapura-Aneka Main Road,

Bangalore-562 106.

//JUDGEMENT//

BY SRI. RAJU K.S, MEMBER

01.    The complainant has filed this complaint under Section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking for a direction to the opposite party No.1 & 2 to refund entire fee amount of Rs.1,04,095/- collected for post-graduate diploma in management course with damages of Rs.1,50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.30,000/-.

02.    The case of the complainant is that, the complainant got enrolled for executive post graduate diploma in management (Executive PGDM) program for January-2017 batch.  The said course having four semesters, starting from January-2017 to May-2018, for that, the complainant had paid registration fee of Rs.26,000/- through JARO EDUCATION represented by Sri. Umesh who was the education coordinator for the Allianz university and Allianz school of business.  The JARO Education supplied the book materials for the 1^st semester after receiving the entire course fee as discussed through the email dated: 17.12.2017. 

03.    As per the email dated: 17.12.2017 JARO education has advised the complainant to pay the semester fee in instalment computed to Rs.35,000/- for each three periods of semester and Rs.30,000/- for the final semester.  Further the above said JARO education advised the complainant to pay Rs.4,000/- for examination fees for each semester and accordingly the complainant has paid Rs.4,000/- for 1^st semester and Rs.4,000/- for 2^nd semester.  In totally, the complainant has paid Rs.1,04,095/- on different dates as called by the opposite party.  The complainant has paid Rs.35,000/- on 01.06.2017, Rs.35,000/- paid on 02.07.2017, Rs.4,047/- paid on 25.04.2017 and Rs.4,048/- paid on 20.08.2017.  The opposite party university has received above said amounts directly through web portal site www.alliance.edu.in.  In this regard the complainant has made several email correspondence with the opposite party from January 2017 to novemeber-2017.

04.    The complainant took the 1^st semester exam in the month of April-2017 and successfully completed the exam.  The opposite party university has stated that, after every semester the marks-card will be issued through post.  But the opposite party issued the 1^st semester marks card through email.  Further in the month of May-2017 during the tenure of 1^st semester the study material for the 2^nd semester was delivered and the classes were beginning through online.  The complainant took the 2^nd semester exam in August-2017 and the opposite party university has promised to announce the result in the month of October-2017 and 3^rd semester will be commenced in November-2017.  For that the complainant has paid fees for both 2^nd and 3^rd semester. 

05.    In the meanwhile there was differences and misunderstanding regarding administration of Allianz university by opposite party No.1 & 2 and the Allianz university has sent an email dated: 25.10.2017 with regard to some case filed between the opposite party No.1 & 2  in O.S. No.3932/2017 and in O.S. No.5148/2017.  Further there was lot of confusions in the running up Allianz University and the above developments put in distress complainant towards future of her education. 

06.    The complainant contacted one Smt. Deepa and Mr. Paul of the Allianz university main campus who were coordinating with the OP No.1 & 2.  Mr. Paul advised the complainant to withdraw from course and to seek for refund of the entire course fee of Rs.1,04,095/- with damages.  Further Mr. Paul said that, the head of the Allianz University had a break up and there has been a lot of confusion with regard to administration of the Allianz University.  Complainant contacted on 21.12.2017 one Mr. Abbay Chabbi who was working as program director under the complainant was studying the course.  The said Abba Chabbi had left the university and himself became distant.

07.    The complainant was ready and willing to pay the 3^rd semester fee and she was expecting the 2^nd semester result.  But the complainant found that the 2^nd semester results have been withheld due to non-payment of 3^rd semester fee. Further the opposite party No.3 University has issued correspondence to the complainant and directed her to contact the opposite party No.2 who is correspondence chancellor for the Allianz University and also called the complainant to send all the fee receipts and payment details to the JARO Education represented by Sri. Umesh.  From the above correspondence the complainant came to know there is no record in the Opposite party No.3 University regarding to the payment and examination details and also with regard to the marks card due to differences in the opposite party No.1 & 2 the future education of the complainant was ruined.  Due to difference in the opposite party No.1 & 2 the issue of marks card and result and the authenticity of the marks cards was in question.  Thereby the validity of the course and credibility of the course also put in to question.  The future education life of complainant was hampered.  Thereby opposite party No.1 to 3 are in deficiency of service. 

08.    Hence as there was no other-way, the complainant got issued legal notice dated: 22.12.2017 and reminder dated: 17.02.2018 to the opposite parties seeking for refund of payment made to them.  In-spite of serving the notice and reminder to opposite party failed to refund the payments made by the complainant.  On the other-hand the op university has issued a notification to email stating that, the term exam is closing by August-2018 and September-2018.  Thereby the opposite parties are liable to the complainant under deficiency of service and as to refund the entire course fee with damages as sought in the complainant. 

09.    In-spite of due service of notice to the opposite parties, the opposite parties have failed to appear in the above complaint and not chosen to file their version.

10.    To prove the case, the complainant has filed affidavit in the form of his evidence in chief and got marked Ex.P.1 to EX.P.12 documents. 

11.    Based on the pleadings and documents filed by the complainant the points that would arise for consideration are as under:-

  (1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

  (2) Whether the complainant is entitle for the 

    relief as sought ?

       (3) What order ?

12.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:-

POINT NO.1 & 2:-  Are in the negative

POINT NO.3 :-          As per the final order

for the following:-

REASONS

13. POINT NO.1 & 2:-  To avoid the repetition of facts of the complaint we have discussed point No.1 & 2 together.  In support of the contention of the complainant, the complainant has filed EX.P.1 fee receipt bearing No. 6379, dated: 04.02.2017, for Rs.1,35,000/- and EX.P.2 fee receipt bearing No.6378, dated: 04.02.2017, for Rs.26,000/- issued by the opposite party.  EX.P.3 is fee structure and schedule payment, EX.P.4 is provisional admission letter dated: 07.02.2017 issued by the opposite party to the complainant offering admission to the executive post graduate diploma in management, EX.P.5 is the provision affiliation letter issued by the university grants commission, Ex.P.6 is the letter dated: 15.12.2010 issued by the IDBI Bank to the admission Co-ordinator showing that, it is an institutional tie-up for educational loan, EX.P.7, Ex.P.8 and EX.P.9 are legal notice dated: 20.08.2018, legal notice dated: 12.02.2017 and reminder dated: 17.02.2018 sent to opposite party.  In addition to that, the complainant further examined by filing EX.P.10 fee receipt, EX.P.11 certificate under section 65(B) of Indian Evidence Act, with EX.P.12 email conversations. 

14.    From the reading of the above documents it is undisputed fact that, the complainant had admitted to the opposite party university for Executive Post Graduate Diploma in Management (Exe. PGDM) for the year January-2017 through one JARO Education.  Further it reveals that, the complainant has paid requisite fees for 1^st and second semester and successfully completed 1^st semester.  The opposite party has failed to provide 2^nd semester result even the complainant appeared in the examination by paying requisite fees. 

15.    Due to some differences and misunderstanding between opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 with regard to the administration of the opposite party No.3 university the opposite parties failed to provide 2^nd semester examination result.  The opposite party No.1 & 2 filed O.S. No.3932/2017 and also in O.S. 5148/2017 in between them.  Further there is lot of confusion with regard to the running up of the opposite party No.3 University and put the complainant in distress with regard to her education future.  The opposite parties failed to provide satisfactory answer to the complainant about her EXE. PGDM course even she is ready to pay the requisite fees as agreed.  But all of a sudden the opposite parties issued a notification by stating that, the said course was closed by August-2018 and September-2018.  In-spite of lot of email correspondence by the complainant the opposite parties failed to give satisfactory answer to the complainant.

“In Civil Appeal No.6807/2008 reported in (2010) 11 SCC at page 159, between Maharshi Dayanand University Vs. Sujeet Kaur, the Hon’ble Apex Court has come to conclusion that, the consumer forum have no jurisdiction to entertain complaint with regard to the education and held that, education is not a service”. 

16.    In the light of the above decision and the subsequent Hon’ble Apex Court decisions, we did not fix the liability of the opposite parties since the above matter is included the education service.  Hence we dismiss the above complaint with a liberty to the complainant to file the above dispute before proper forum, accordingly we answer point No.1 & 2 in negative.

17.    POINT NO.3:-     As discussed supra, for the foregoing reasons we proceed to pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint is dismissed with a liberty to the complainant to approach the jurisdictional court of law for the relief in question, in accordance with law, if advised.  No order as to costs.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of the pleading and evidence to the parties.

Applications pending, if any, stands disposed-off in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open Commission on 05^th Day of MAY, 2023)                                            

• REKHA SAYANNAVAR)    (RAJU K.S)         (SHIVARAMA. K)    
•  

//ANNEXURE//

Witness examined for the complainant side:

Miss. Chandana.S, the complainant (PW-1) has filed affidavit in the form of her evidence in chief. 

Documents got marked for the complainant side:

1) Receipt bearing No.6379, dated: 04.02.2017 for Rs.1,35,000/- - Ex.P.1.

3) Fee structure & schedule of payment for 31^st batch of the course of EXE. PGDM for Jan-2017 – EX.P.3

4) Letter of provisional admission dated: 07.02.2017 – EX.P.4.

5) Copy of letter issued by University Grants Commission, New Delhi, - EX.P.5

6) Copy of letter dt.15.12.2010 from IDBI Bank – EX.P.6.

7) Copy of legal notice dt.20.08.2018 – EX.P.7.

8) Copy of another legal notice dt.22.12.2017 – Ex.P.8

9) Copies of the postal receipts – EX.P.8(a) to P.8(c).

10) Reminder notice dt.17.02.2018 – EX.P.9

11) Postal receipts – Ex.P.9(a) to P.9(b).

Witness examined for the opposite parties side:        

• NIL –

Documents got marked for the Opposite Parties side:

• NIL -

• REKHA SAYANNAVAR)    (RAJU K.S)         (SHIVARAMA. K)    
•