- (1.) The complaint filed under Sections 17 of the Consumer Protection Act-1986:- Gist of the complaint in brief are as follows :- Complainant claiming Rs.19,20,000/- as compensation for provisional loss and Rs.1,00,000/- for mental agony and refund of Rs.19,000/- towards tuition fees and interest of Rs.6,385.50 in all Rs.20,46,285.50 for the deficiency and unfair trade practice in conducting the course.
(2.) Complainant joined advance level course in computer science in the 1st opposite party?s institution after appearing for necessary entrance examinations and on payment of Rs.9,700/- as tuition fees for the course of 2001 for which 2nd opposite party is the controlling authority of the 1st opposite party. In order to qualify with advanced higher studies for his professional employment in the higher category and the complainant appeared for the first semester examination during January 2002. During the examination instead of 9 students actually admitted in the course 11 students were permitted to write examination and the results of the first semester examination without including internal marks were announced just 2 days prior to the commencement of 2nd semester examination and second semester classes were continued in an irregular manner and the examination was conducted during July 2002 and since the first semester results were announced just two days before the commencement of second semester examination, the complainant was not able to attend the second semester examination and since the complainant was declared failed in two papers in the first semester against the assurance of awarding 40% of the minimum marks assured in the prospectus and without adding internal marks which caused untold misery and hardship to the complainant. The 1st opposite party has not conducted the rest of the semesters on account of irregularities, corrupt in financial matters also by following Nepotism/favoritism by the 1st opposite party in all kinds of matters and mal administration. Hence he did not pay fees for third semester as he lost hope with the institution. Hence due to the in fighting between the course coordinator under Secretary of the 1st opposite party, the status and reputation of the institution become worst in spite of the representation made to the head office at New Delhi and thereafter none of the students continued the course and the course itself was abandoned on extraneous reasons causing much hardship, inconvenience and shattering hopes of further prospects of the complainant. Hence the complainant issued a legal notice on 9.7.04 calling for compensation, refund of money and thereafter filed this complaint for the reliefs as stated above.
(3.) The opposite parties denied the allegations of the complainant in the written version and contended the complaint is not maintainable before the District Forum as complainant is not a consumer under the Act. 1st opposite party is only an associated wing of 2nd opposite party. Complaint is false there is no cause of action and barred by limitation. Complainant has not paid requisite fees nor attended the classes regularly conducted by the 1st opposite party. Being guilty himself, he cannot claim any relief. Only the 2nd opposite party is the final authority in all the matters connected with the imparting of education. No irregularities in conducting the courses. The complainant cannot question the procedure adopted by the 2nd opposite party in announcing the results. There is no necessity in indulging mal practices, complainant trying to defame the institution for wrongful gain at the cost of the opposite party. The other students left the institution after successful completion of the course or on their voluntary to pursue other opportunities. Hence the complaint to be dismissed with exemplary costs.;