M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties 1 and 2, in OP.No.29/2000, on the file of District Forum, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri, are the appellants in F.A.No.516/2007 and 528/2007, respectively.
(2.) The parties are referred as arrayed in the complaint. The facts leading to the case: The 1st respondent/ complainant, had admitted his son Anbu, in the 1st opposite party ITI, by paying a capitation of Rs.10000/-, on three different dates, including admission fee of Rs.750/-, in MMV course, for the academic year 1997 & 99. But the 1st opposite party, demanding more capitation fees, refused to continue his son, in the second year, and not only that, when approached, they have given a hall ticket, as if his son studied in the 2nd opposite party ITI viz. Sri Balaji ITI, for the academic year 1997-99, that too in fitter trade. In view of the fact, that the complainants son was admitted in MMV course, his son did not attend the examination for fitter course. The opposite parties, colluding together, sold the seat allotted to the son of the complainant to somebody, for Rs.20000/-, and committed negligent act as well as deficiency, in not imparting education as required/ agreed. Because of the negligent act committed by both the opposite parties, the complainant was put to mental agony, monetary loss etc., and claiming the same, legal notice was issued, not received by the 1st opposite party, whereas a false reply was given by the 2nd opposite party, as if the son of the complainant was admitted in their institution. Because of the deficiency committed by both the parties, though the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10 lakhs, as compensation, it is restricted to Rs.5 lakhs. Thus, based upon the negligent act, as well as deficiency committed, a consumer complaint came to be filed, for the refund of the capitation fees, as well as for the recovery of a sum of Rs.5 lakhs, as compensation, against both the opposite parties.
(3.) The 1st opposite party, admitting that the complainants son was admitted in their institution, on payment of admission fees of Rs.750/-, he failed to appear, for the classes conducted, pursuant to the admission, that they have not demanded, or collected any capitation fees as alleged, that for the non-attendance of the classes, by the complainants son, the 1st opposite party cannot be held responsible, that the complainants son having joined in the 2nd opposite party, though studied, failed to appear for the examination, and suppressing the same, on false and frivolous grounds, a complaint came to be filed, in order to extract money, that since they have not committed any negligent act, or deficiency in service, they are not liable to refund or pay any money as claimed. Thus it is prayed, the petition may be dismissed with cost.;