MUKTESH SHARMA Vs. ARVIND PRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this revision is to the order dated 8.12.2006 of M.P. Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal partly allowing appeal against the order dated 3.5.2006 of a District Forum and setting aside part of its order pertaining to award of compensation of Rs. 50,000 to the petitioner. District Forum had directed the respondent to refund amount of fee of Rs. 8,200 and pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation for mental agony etc. with cost of Rs. 500.

(2.) FINDING returned by the District Forum on a complaint filed by the petitioner complainant holding the respondents opposite parties to be deficient in service was set aside by the State Commission on the grounds that application form for admission stated that course fee payable would be Rs. 9, 250 if an Institute is situated within the Municipal Council area, fee payable would be Rs. 9,250 and respondent. Institute was situated at Mandsore which is a District Headquarter with Municipal Council and since the fee paid by the petitioner was Rs. 8,200 as against Rs. 9,250 he was rightly refused admission to the examination and not entitled to have certificate from the respondent of its franchiser. Though copy of application form for admission has not been filed along with revision petition but para 1 of the complaint towards end notices that before admission, the petitioner was told that the fee would be Rs. 9,250. Having heard the father and authorized representative of petitioner. I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the approach of State Commission warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. Revision dismissed.