First Appeal No. 314 of 2010. Case: Ashok Aggarwal Vs SRM University. Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
|Case Number:||First Appeal No. 314 of 2010|
|Party Name:||Ashok Aggarwal Vs SRM University|
|Counsel:||For Appellant: S.K. Gupta, Advocate and For Respondents: Deepak Ahluwalia, Advocate|
|Judges:||B.C. Kandpal, J. (President) and D.K. Tyagi, H.J.S., Member|
|Issue:||Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 11(2), 15; Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 23, 28|
|Citation:||III (2014) CPJ 259|
|Judgement Date:||August 29, 2014|
|Court:||Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission|
B.C. Kandpal, J. (President)
This is complainant's appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 21.9.2010 passed by the District Forum, Dehradun, thereby dismissing his consumer complaint No. 206 of 2008. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that on the basis of the advertisement issued by the opposite party No. 1 - SRM University, Kattankulathur-603 203, Kancheepuram District, Tamilnadu, Master Akshay Aggarwal, the son of the complainant, applied for admission in the said University in B.Tech. course for the academic session 2007-08 and appeared in the entrance test. The son of the complainant was granted provisional admission in the said University after deposit of Rs. 10,000. Later on, the fee of Rs. 1,55,000 was deposited. The son of the complainant was asked to join the University on 22.8.2007. When the son of the complainant reached the University, he found that there were no world class facilities in the University, as was assured. He was granted room on the 10th floor of the hostel and there was no facility of elevator/lift. Later on, the son of the complainant was transferred to the opposite party No. 2, the Modinagar campus of the University. It was also alleged that excess amount of Rs. 44,000 was charged from the complainant and that there was also no proper facility of hostel at Modinagar campus of the University also. The son of the complainant decided to withdraw from the University and the complainant asked the opposite parties for refund of the fee; which was declined by the opposite parties. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Dehradun.
The opposite parties filed written statement before the District Forum and pleaded that as per rules, sum of Rs. 75,000 has been refunded to the complainant and that the District Forum, Dehradun has got no territorial jurisdiction in the matter.
The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, dismissed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 21.9.2010. Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant has filed the present appeal.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the SRM University, where the son of the complainant had taken admission, is situated at...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL