C.C.PANT, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 22.02.2013 passed by the District Forum, Haridwar in consumer complaint No. 342 of 2010, thereby allowing the consumer complaint and directing the opposite party to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 1,30,000/ - within a month from the date of the order, failing which the opposite party has also been held liable to pay interest on the said amount @ 5% per annum from the date of filing the consumer complaint till payment.
(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are that one Sh. Ankit Walia complainant took admission in the first year of M.B.A. course conducted by Gurukul Kangri University (for short "University") opposite party for the academic session 2009 -10 and deposited a total sum of Rs. 1,28,115/ - with the University against tuition fee and other various heads. However, the complainant left the studies immediately after the start of the academic session and requested the authorities of the University to refund the fee. The complainant has alleged that despite the assurance given to him by the concerned authorities for refund of the fee, the fee was not refunded. Ultimately, the complainant sent registered notice dated 02.08.2010 to the University through his counsel. The notice was duly replied by the Law Officer of the University, intimating that the fee would be refunded, if the complainant applies for the same. The complainant has stated in his consumer complaint that he had already submitted his application for the refund of the fee. Inspite of this reply and assurance given by the Law Officer with regard to refund of the fee, the University did not refund the fee to the complainant. This led the complainant to file a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Haridwar. The District Forum, after an appreciation of the facts of the case, allowed the consumer complaint vide its order dated 22.02.2013 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the order, the University -opposite party through its Registrar has filed this appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. The learned counsel for the appellant -opposite party submitted that the respondent -complainant had attended the classes of the First Semester programme of M.B.A. course and by that time, the admission process had finished. The respondent left the course without giving timely intimation to the appellant and his seat remained vacant for rest of the course, which caused financial loss to the appellant. The only intimation, that was received by the appellant, was through the registered notice dated 02.08.2010 sent by the respondent. This shows that the intimation with regard to withdrawal from said course was sent by the respondent to the appellant after one year. The instructions issued by A.I.C.T.E., New Delhi for refund of the fee do not apply to such cases. The District Forum has, thus, failed to make a proper and just appreciation of the factual and legal aspect of the case and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.;