IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 26th day of December, 2019
Filed on 31.12. 2018
Present
1. Sri.E.M. Muhammed Ibrahim , BA,LLM (President)
2. Smt.Sholly.P.R,LLB (Member)
in
CC/No.338/2018
Between
Complainant:- Opposite party:-
Sri. George Varghese The Managing Director
Manager, Mar Philaxinos ITC, Kerala SIDCO
& Technical Institute Housing Board Building
Ward-X ,Chengannur(Mc) Santhinagar, Thiruvanathapuram
Chengannur Village
Chengannur Taluk, Alappuzha
ORDER
SMT. SHOLLY P.R.(MEMBER)
Complainant’s case in brief is as follows:-
The complainant who is the manager of an institute by name, M/s MarPhilaxinos ITC & Technical Institute functioning at Chengannur, Alappuzha district. On seeing an advertisement of the opposite party SIDCO in Malayala Manorama daily relating to the off campus course the complainant registered for the said course for some student by remitting Rs.17,100/- to the opposite party on 16-09-2015. Thereafter the opposite party has not given any intimation to the complainant and therefore the complainant made enquiry through telephone and has informed that the officer concerned was on leave. Then the complainant approached directly to the office of the opposite party understood that the said program was cancelled and also informed that the amount remitted will be returned. On the basis of the above information the complainant has repaid the amount to the students from whom he collected and remitted the amount for the course. Thereafter the complainant sent a letter to the opposite party to return the fee remitted but the opposite party evaded by stating that there is no provision to return the amount remitted and also informed that they are ready to start the course along with the opposite party at the earliest. But the complainant has no interest to start the said course since the opposite party has shown deceitful attitude. More over it was learned that the certificate issued by the opposite party will not get attestation from NORKA. Therefore the complainant filed the complaint for realization of amount of Rs. 17,100/- and for getting Rs. 5600/- as compensation from the opposite party.
Notice issued to the opposite party was accepted and in response to the notice the opposite party made representation on the first day of hearing but later they have not filed any Vakalath/authorization nor filed any version resisting the complaint. Hence the Forum decided to proceed with the case Exparte.
The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of the chief of examination and got marked Ext.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the original receipt issued by the opposite party by accepting the registration fee for the course. Ext.A2 is the letter issued by the opposite party intimating the complainant regarding non-returning of the said registration fee. Ext.A3 is the copy of guidelines regarding the off- campus course.
Heard the complainant and perused the records.
The unchallenged averments in the complaint and proof affidavit would indicate that the complainant has entered into an agreement regarding for off-campus course with the opposite party on 15/9/2015 and remitted registration fee as shown Ext.A1 receipt on the next day itself. But it is clear from Ext.A2 letter that the opposite party has not started the course and hence the complainant demanded to return the registration fee, but not paid the same but advised the complainant to start the course immediately. However the complainant was not ready to co-operate with opposite party who is very irresponsible and insisted to return the amount and sent letter which is clear from Ext.A3 reply letter. As per clause No.6 of Ext.A3 guidelines it is clear that the registration fee should be returned to the applicants in the event of not setting up the centre for off campus course after deducting Rs. 5000/-, even if the complainant filed to setup the centre. Here in this case it is clear that the complainant was ready to setup the centre and start the course but due to the irresponsible attitude of the opposite party the attempt was failed. In view of the materials available on record it is clear that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and complainant is entitled to get back the amount which he paid to the opposite party as per through Ext.A1 receipt with interest and costs. The complainant is also entitled to get reasonable compensation.
In the result the complaint stands allowed, directing the opposite party to pay Rs. 17,100/- (Rupees Seventeen thousand one hundred only) with interest @ 9% per annum from 16-9-2015 till realization. The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation and Rs. 2000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) as costs. The order shall be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order., failing which the complainant is at liberty to realize Rs.22,100/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum till realization along with costs Rs.2000/- from the opposite party and its assets.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 26th day of December, 2019.
Sd/-Smt. Sholly.P.R (Member)
Sd/-Sri.E.M. Muhammed Ibrahim (President)
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
Ext.A1 - Original Receipt.
Ext.A2 - Letter issued by Opposite party.
Ext.A3 - Copy of Guidelines
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
To
Complainant/Oppo. party/S.F.
By Order
Senior Superintendent
Typed by:- Br/-
Compared by:-
