State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Zishan Khan Qureshi vs Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd. on 17 June, 2011
CHHATTISGARH STATE
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PANDRI, RAIPUR (C.G.)
(A/11/2464)
Appeal No.183/2011
Instituted on : 17/03/2011
Zishan Khan Qureshi,
S/o Shri Mazeed Khan Qureshi,
R/o : House No.480/20,
Indira Gandhi Ward, Kelkarpara,
Behind Hotel Grand International, Station Road,
Raipur (C.G.) .... Appellant
Vs.
Avalon Aviation Academy Pvt. Ltd.
Through : Director, New Bus Stand,
Pagaria Complex, Beside M. T.V. Channel, Pandri,
Raipur (C.G). ..... Respondent
PRESENT :
HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI S.C. VYAS, PRESIDENT
HON'BLE SMT. VEENA MISRA, MEMBER
HON'BLE SHRI V.K. PATIL, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES :
Shri K. Anandani, for appellant.
Respondent proceeded ex-parte.
ORDER (ORAL)
DATED : 17/06/2011 PER :- HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI S.C. VYAS, PRESIDENT This appeal is directed against order dated 23.02.2011 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (C.G.) (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in Complaint Case No.380/2010, whereby the District Forum, has directed the respondent herein, to deduct the amount for study of one & half month by the appellant in it's // 2 // institution and then to pay back the remaining amount deposited by the appellant as per it's rules and prospectus, along with interest @ 6% p.a. and also to pay cost of litigation Rs.700/-.
2. The only ground on which this appeal, has been preferred is that District Forum, has not clarified as to how much amount, is required to be deducted by the respondent from the amount deposited by the appellant.
3. None appeared for the respondent even after service of notice of this appeal.
4. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record of the District Forum.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that a sum of Rs.41,730/- was the amount, which was deposited by the appellant at the time of commencement of Semester for studying in the institution of the respondent. The appellant studied in the institution of the respondent for one & half month, as per finding of the District Forum and therefore, at the most, 1/4th of the aforesaid amount, is required to be deducted by the respondent and remaining amount is required to be refunded back by the respondent to the appellant.
// 3 //
6. It is not in dispute that fees was paid by the appellant for Semester of six months and the study could not be continued by him at the most after one & half month and that is why, District Forum has directed the respondent to pay back the amount deposited by the appellant after deducting amount for study of one & half month by the appellant in the respondent institution. When we calculated that amount for study of one & half month by the appellant in the respondent institution, then reasonably it can be inferred that a sum of Rs.10,432.50 could be the amount, which was required to be deducted by the respondent and remaining amount was required to be refunded back by the respondent to the appellant.
7. Therefore, allowing the appeal, the impugned order is modified to the extent that respondent institution, is directed to refund a sum of Rs.31,297.50 (Rs.41,730/- minus Rs.10,432.50), along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till date of payment to the appellant herein, and also to pay cost of litigation as quantified by the District Forum as Rs.700/-. With this modification in the impugned order, the appeal is disposed of. No order as to the cost of this appeal.
(Justice S.C.Vyas) (Smt. Veena Misra) (V.K. Patil)
President Member Member
/06/2011 /06/2011 /06/2011