PRINCIPAL, ST THOMAS COLLEGE Vs. KU PALOMI BENERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been preferred against order dated 8.10.2010 passed in Complaint Case No. 239/ 2010 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), whereby the complaint was allowed and the OP No. 1 was directed to refund proportionate fee to the complainant together with interest @ 6% p.a., Rs. 1,000 for mental harassment and Rs. 1,000 towards cost of litigation.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the complainant had taken admission in the educational institute of OP No. 1 in B.Sc. Biotechnology, 1st year and had deposited Rs. 12,220 on 16.6.2008. She attended classes at OP No. 1 institute from 1.7.2008 to 31.8.2008. By that time, she received intimation that she has got admission in Genetic Science, at Oxford College of Science, Bangalore. Hence, she repeatedly requested OP No. 1 to give Transfer Certificate and Migration Certificate, but despite such requests, the certificates were not provided till the complainant deposited remaining amount towards entire fees for the whole year. In this way, complainant's father had to deposit additional amount of Rs. 14,150 and only then the certificates were issued. As per averments of the complaint, the complainant and her father were coerced to deposit the additional amount as mentioned above and this act on the part of the OP No. 1 amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. It was further averred that as OP No. 1 institute is affiliated to OP No. 2 it is the duty of the university (OP No. 2) to control such acts of charging exorbitant fees by OP No. 1, but the said OP also failed to provide any relief to the complainant though repeated letters were written. Both the OPs were liable in the facts of the case. Compensation was claimed.

(3.) THE plea taken in the written version filed by OP No. 1 was that the institute was prepared to provide education to her but the complainant had left the studies in mid session on her own. As per rules of the institute the Complainant was required to deposit fee for the remaining academic period. The allegations of coercion were denied. It was averred that in the prospectus itself it was clearly mentioned that fees once deposited, will not be refunded and the certificate will be provided only after payment of entire fees. It was further averred that the complainant had received Transfer Certificate on 26.9.2009, prior to that the date of admission had expired w.e.f. 19.8.2008. So, any other student could not be admitted and the seat remained vacant for the entire session. Claiming Rs. 25,000 towards compensatory cost OP No. 1 prayed for dismissal of complaint.