M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) The respondent in this appeal, who is the complainant, is the mother of 3 years old baby Upasana. The complainant paying a sum of Rs.23,750/-, admitted her daughter, Upasana in the opposite partys School. The opposite party expressing untenable dissatisfaction about the behavioral aspect of the baby Upasana, on 5.08.2004, requested the complainant, to withdraw the child. The complainant, having heard good about the opposite party, believing that they will mould the child properly, admitted in the opposite partys school, which is proved, otherwise. The complainants daughter had attended the School not more than 22 hours, spread over 37 days. As requested by the opposite party, further apprehending fear about the safety of the child, the complainant withdrew the child and when requested for payment of the fee paid, they have paid only Rs.9,500/-, refusing to pay the balance of Rs.11,400/-, taking into account the service rendered, which should be construed as deficiency in service, despite notice. Though the opposite party has filled up the seat vacated by her daughter, refused to pay the amount, causing mental agony, for which also, the complainant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Thus, a consumer complaint came to be filed before the District Forum, Chennai (South), claiming total sum of Rs.66,913/-.
(3.) The opposite party/appellant admitting the admission of the child, as well the withdrawal of the child from the School, opposed the complaint, inter alia, contending, that right from the beginning, the parents had adopted a very careless attitude, not supporting in the acclimatization of the child, to the environment, that they have not dropped or picked the child on time, resulting inconvenience and hardship to the opposite party that as per the Prospectus, which is to be construed as binding terms and conditions, refundable amount of Rs.9,500/- was given forthwith, refusing to give the balance, which they are entitled, which cannot be termed as deficiency in service, and that there was no negligence or deficiency in service and in this view, they are not liable to refund any amount, as the case may be, thereby praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;