MANMOHAN KRISHAN SOOD Vs. SUNIL DUTT SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms. Ruchika Sood, daughter of the complainant wanted admission in the BDS course in response to an advertisement which was published in 'the Tribune' dated 8.8.1998 and earlier in 'dainik Tribune' dated 5.7.1998 at Sitapur for the year 1998-1999. The medical college was being run by Vinayaka Mission and Sh. A. Shanmugasundaram was acting as its Chairman, now impleaded as respondent No.3. Shri Sunil Dutt Sharma, who was the Director of admission maintaining his office at 1261-B, Sector 41b, Chandigarh, respondent No.1. A Bank Draft No.575169 dated 7.9.1998 of State Bank of India, Punjab University, Chandigarh was drawn in favour of Vinayaka Foundation and it was the amount towards annual fee for the first year of the course of BDS at Sitapur. Another sum of Rs.25,000/- was demanded by Sh. Sunil Dutt Sharma and it was paid to him on 9.7.1998 in cash. Besides this another sum of Rs.12,900/- was handed over to Sh. Sunil Dutt Sharma at Chandigarh by means of a Cheque No.571554 dated 2.11.1998 and it was also encashed. It has been alleged that the course did not start till mid November, 1998 and the complainant became worried about the education and future of his daughter. Since the classes were not started at all and no reply was received from the respondent, the present complaint has been instituted. The relief claimed in para 12 is reproduced as under : (i) Refund of the money deposited by the complainant amounting to Rs.1,12,900/- alongwith interest thereof @ 18% p. a. from the date of payment till the date of actual refund; (ii) An amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Lakh) as compensation for the wastage of one precious year of a brilliant young student; (iii) An amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh) as compensation for immense physical harassment and mental agony suffered by the complainant, his wife, family members and the student herself. (iv) An amount of Rs.11,000/- towards Counsel's fee and litigation expenses.

(2.) Mr. Jatin Salwan, Advocate appeared for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 on 26.4.1999 and thereafter the case was adjourned to 26.5.1999, 10.6.1999, 6.7.1999, 30.7.1999, and on 27.8.1999 and when no reply was filed on 27.8.1999 defence of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 was struck off.

(3.) The notices published in the newspaper containing the address of the Director of Admission having his office at Chandigarh are contained in Annexure C-1. A copy of the bank draft in favour of Vinayaka Foundation in the sum of Rs.75,000/- payable at Sitapur is Annexure C-2. Another cheque dated 2.11.1998 for Rs.12,900/- drawn on Bank of India is Annexure C-3. The affidavit of complainant who is father of Ruchika Sood is Annexure C-4. The admission card of Ms. Ruchika Sood issued by the respondent is Annexure C-5. The telephones bills which shows that the complainant had been contacting the respondent at Sitapur finds mention in Annexure C-6. The result certificate of Ms. Ruchika Sood is Annexure C-7. It has been pointed out that the complainant was 17 years of age and had not reached the majority at the time of institution of the complaint.