S.C. Case No. CC/20 of 2011. Case: Mr. Anuj Saraswat Vs M/s. W.L.C. College (India) Ltd. and Ors.. West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case Number:S.C. Case No. CC/20 of 2011
Party Name:Mr. Anuj Saraswat Vs M/s. W.L.C. College (India) Ltd. and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: Srinibash Misra and Prasanta Banerjee and For Respondents: None
Judges:Kalidas Mukherjee, President, S. Coari, Member and Mridula Roy, Member
Issue:Consumer Law
Judgement Date:September 18, 2013
Court:West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
 
FREE EXCERPT

Order:

S. Coari, Member

  1. The present petition of complaint has been filed by the Complainant, Mr. Anuj Saraswat, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the Ops, namely; (1) M/s. W.L.C. College (India) Ltd., (2) Mr. Vinay Pasricha, Chairman, W.L.C. College (I) Ltd., (3) Mr. Sandip Mitra, Kolkata Campus Director, (4) The Branch Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce and (5) Union of India, through Secretary to the Ministry of Human Resources Development, thereby praying for a direction upon the Ops to pay a sum of Rs. 3,99,916.00 being the cost and expenses of the course in question along with interest @18% per annum and to pay a sum of Rs. 20,00,000.00 as compensation and damages. The case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant after availing of educational loan facilities to the tune of Rs. 3,20,000/- from the O.P./Bank got himself admitted in Post Graduate Programme (Finance) in Business Economics under the O.P. No. 1 after observing all the relevant and connected formalities. According to the complainant: the complainant observed all the formalities for registration and payment of tuition fees as required by the O.P. No. 1 from time to time and completed two years P.G.P.B.F. (Finance) course. But for reasons best known to the O.P. No. 1 the result of the last semester, which was duly held in the month of June, 2010 and for which the complainant sat for, was arbitrarily and illegally withheld. As the financial condition of the complainant is not sound enough, it is the O.P. No. 1, who had arranged the loan facilities from the O.P./Bank in favour of the complainant for the purpose of pursuing the studies with the O.P. No. 1, as mentioned above. It is the further case of the complainant that the complainant was allured and/or induced by the O.P. No. 1 by the advertisement and brochure thereby assuring "Earn while your learn" and also giving assurance to the effect that during the last part of the course the complainant will be sent to different companies as per the list in the brochure to take appropriate training. According to the complainant, the Examinee complainant was not sent to any commercial firm/Company as per the list for undergoing any training as assured by the O.P. No. 1 and that the complainant having left stranded without handing him over the results of the final semester and refunding the money so deposited by the complainant in respect of the course in question thereby causing total...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL