Barkat Ali Zaidi, President (Oral):
1. The facts of the case are that the complainant for the academic year 2006-07 took admission in August, 2006 in OP Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan for one year diploma course in Hotel Management, and for which he deposited as fees an amount of Rs. 20,000 on 31.8.2006. The complainant met with an accident and his leg was fractured. He lodged an FIR under Sections 279/337, IPC in connection of accident with the Police, the copy of which and a photograph of his fractured leg are available on file. The complainants case is that he contacted the OP several times and requested the OP to return the fee amount, which the OP declined. The complainant, therefore, filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum with a prayer that the OP be directed to refund him Rs. 20,000 and a compensation of an amount of Rs. 10,000.
2. The OP opposed the claim and filed the written statement alleging the Information Brochure for the academic year 2006-07 supplied to the candidate, before admission, provides in Clause 11, that fees once deposited, would not be refunded under any circumstances whatsoever. The OP pleaded, that the complainant never intimated the OP about the fact of his accident, and that the complainant did not attend the classes. The OP pleaded that OP is a charitable institution and denied any deficiency on its part.
3.On consideration of evidence of both the parties, the District Consumer Forum held that depriving the complainant from refund of fee, when the complainants leg was plastered, which takes a lot of time to be removed, is uncharitable, and the seat can easily be given to the next candidate, and in this manner neither the student nor the institution will face any loss. The Forum directed the OP to refund Rs. 20,000 to the complainant as fee, Rs. 10,000 towards deficiency of service, mental agony and harassment and Rs. 5,000 as costs.
4.That is what brings the appellant in appeal before this Commission.
5.We have heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Shivashish Gunwal, Counsel for respondent.
6.We disagree with the view of District Forum. In the first place it has to be noticed that in the Brochure of the Institution, it has been mentioned in Clause 11 that amount of fee paid will not be refundable. The terms and condition mentioned in the Brochure will hold ground and no reason has been assigned why the terms and conditions of the Brochure will not apply.
7.Secondly, it has to be seen that there is no evidence on record to establish that the leg of the complainant-respondent had been fractured and had been put in plaster. The only thing filed in this connection is a photo and no report of the Radiologist, the Forum is not supposed to find out from the photo whether there is a fracture or not? In the FIR also, lodged by complainant respondent, there is no mention of any fracture, and what has only been said is that injury was caused to the right leg. It has also to been seen that no notice was given by complainant-respondent to institute appellant for refund of fee and straightaway a complaint was filed and the Institution was also not told by the complainant-respondent that he has suffered a fracture in his leg which has placed in plaster and he was not in a position to attend classes. It will thus appear that it has not been proved that the complainant suffered a fracture in the leg.
8.For all these reasons, the claim could not be upheld and the decision of the District Consumer Forum needs to be revised.
Order
The appeal is allowed. The order of the Forum is set aside. The complaint shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
9.FDR, if any, deposited, be released in favour of the appellant after completing the formalities and obtaining proper receipt.
10.A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.
Appeal allowed.