JAWAHAR GOYAL Vs. ASHU RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is an appeal against the order dated 28.1.2003 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. Bathinda (hereinafter called the District Forum.)

(2.) Brief facts stated in the complaint are that respondent No.2 (opposite party No.1 before the District Forum) (hereinafter called opposite party No.1) was a service-oriented company and deals in the computer education to the students against consideration and the appellant (opposite party No.2 before the District Forum) (hereinafter called opposite party No.2) and Baljinder Singh, NIIT Bathinda Centre, G. T. Road, near Bus Stand, Bathinda now c/o Procad Technology Centre, G. T. Road, Bathinda (opposite party No.3 before the District Forum) (not impleaded as a party in this appeal) (hereinafter called opposite party No.3) were its branch offices and Principal Officers of opposite party No.1 at Bathinda. Allured by the advertisement of the opposite parties, respondent No.1-complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) along with her father approached opposite party Nos.2 and 3 at Bathinda for admission in NIIT Course. After having passed the faculty test, she was admitted in the two years computer course in NIIT comprised four semesters, which included PWC+sw 1 Course. Opposite parties conveyed rough estimate to the complainant that about Rs.35,000/- to Rs.40,000/- shall be charged from her for two years NIIT course. She had deposited Rs.5,450/- as admission fee and registration charges vide receipt No.3329/2105 dated 5.8.2000 with opposite party No.2. Opposite party Nos.2 and 3 had conveyed to her that one month course Swift India will start on 16.8.2000 and accordingly, she joined the above said course on 16.8.2000, which was duly passed by her. It is then alleged in the complaint that opposite party Nos.2 and 3 along with one Miss Priyanka conveyed to her that course/semester-C had been dropped from the two years' NIIT Course as they had no staff for C-Semester at Bathinda and further conveyed to her that now the complainant had to appear only in three semesters i. e. A, B and D to which she objected to and conveyed to the opposite parties that her two years course in computer education shall not be completed without C-Semester/course. Opposite parties conveyed to her that if during the above said period of two years requisite staff becomes available then the same shall be started at Bathinda. It is further alleged in the complaint that reposing confidence in the opposite parties, she continued to study in the above said Institution with the hope that everything shall be according to the commitment made by the opposite parties. The opposite parties again got deposited Rs.3,100/- from her vide receipt No.3697/2105 dated 6.2.2001, as instalment payment. She requested the opposite parties to give the final details of the amount to be charged from her for two years course. She completed her A-semester from the above said institution, which she had passed, but the result card was not supplied by the opposite parties. Again as per requirement of the opposite parties, she had deposited Rs.3,000/- on 7.4.2001 vide receipt No.3788/2105, Rs.1000/- on 7.5.2001 vide receipt No.3820/2105 and Rs.2,000/- on 7.6.2001 vide receipt No.3866/2105. It was then alleged in the complaint by the complainant that opposite party Nos.2 and 3 had conveyed to her in the month of June, 2001 that the institution was running into heavy losses and they advised her to get herself enrolled at other branch office of NIIT at Patiala, which was being run by the same person i. e. , Mr. Jawahar Goyal, for the remaining study. She then alleged in the complaint that the opposite parties had played a fraud with her and had not fulfilled the commitment made to the complainant. She had to waste more than one year in the above said course without any fault of hers and had wasted more than Rs.14,000/-. She had written numerous letters to the opposite parties to fulfil their commitment but all in vain. Hence the complaint for directing the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.14,550/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of deposit till payment and to pay her a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-.

(3.) Opposite party No.1 before the District Forum was proceeded ex parte. Opposite party No.3 was deleted on a statement made by the complainant that she did not seek any relief from opposite party No.3.