LAWS(NCD)-1995-12-11

SONIKA TANDON Vs. RAUF MUSLIM JAMIA BAHERA

Decided On December 26, 1995
SONIKA TANDON Appellant
V/S
RAUF MUSLIM JAMIA BAHERA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This complaint has been made on the ground of negligent and deficient service provided to the complainant No.1 by the opposite party and also on the ground of unfair trade practice indulged in by the opposite party. The opposite party No.1 of whom the opposite party Nos.2 to 4 are the office bearers issued an advertisement in Daily Excelsior Jammu on 21.10.1992 inviting applications for admission to First Year B. D. S. Course, wherein it was specifically stated that the local students should get in touch with the opposite party at Hotel Samrat, Jammu on 25.10.1992. Persuant to this the complainant approached them, purchased an application form for. Rs.100/- and submitted an application under Receipt No.908. This was done on an assurance being extended by the opposite party that their College was duly recognized and registered by the Dental Council of India. The complainant was, thereafter, invited to join the Institute after making payments of Rs.40,000/- by two bank drafts drawn on Punjab National Bank, Rehari in favour of the opposite party. The opposite party accepted the amount and a certificate was issued registering the complainant No.1 as a student of the aforesaid Institute under Roll No.17. She submitted all the requisite certificates and joined the College on 1.11.1992.

(2.) It seems that the woe of the complainant started thereafter as neither the examinations for the First Year was taken nor was the syllabus for the First Year BDS Course cleared. The constant requests of the complainant failed to persuade the opposite party to take the examinations of the First Year as a result of which the complainant was finally compelled to take leave and proceed to home at Jammu on 1st of September, 1993.

(3.) After narrating the tale to her parents further approaches were made to the opposite party and finally they were told to go back to their homes as they will be called back as soon as studies were restarted. Even after their personal visit to the opposite party in February, 1995 the opposite party failed to provide necessary services as a result of which she was compelled to vacate the hostel accommodation and come back to her home. The opposite party even failed to refund the amounts she had deposited.