Delhi District Court
Chandraprabhu Jain College Of Higher ... vs Mayank Garg on 7 November, 2022
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER SINGH
SCJ CUM RC (NORTH), ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
In the matter of :
Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law
(Through its AR Mr. Sanjeev Sharma)
Office at: Plot no. OFC, SectorA8,
Narela, Delhi110040. ........... Plaintiff
VERSUS
Mayank Garg
S/o Sh. Sanjay Kumar Garg
At: H. No. 2319, Sector15,
Sonipat, Delhi 131001
Email Id: [email protected]
(M) 8199052871/9034103198. ..........Defendant
EXPARTE JUDGMENT
CNR No. DLNT030000562021
Case No. 97/2021
Under Section Recovery of Rs. 67,778/ alongwith
pendente lite and future interest
Date of Institution 12.01.2021
Date of reserve for order 18.10.2022
Date of Final Order 07.11.2022
Final Order Decreed
BRIEF FACTS
The present suit is for recovery of Rs. 67,778/ alongwith CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 1/7 pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum filed by the plaintiff against the defendant.
1. Succinctly stated facts as mentioned in the plaint are as under: Plaintiff is a private selffinancing College founded under the aegis of Rishi Aurobindo Educational Society who is being represented through Mr. Sanjiv Sharma. The defendant Mayank Garg was a student of plaintiff college who was appeared for the Common Entrance Test for BCA (M) Programme and secured admission in three year BCA (I) Programme course.
The GNCT of Delhi vide notification dated 29.05.2017 promulgated the 'Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non Exploitative Fee and other measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence) Act, 2007. As per said Act, GNCT constituted a Fee Regulatory Committee who had provide its recommendations to the Government. The GNCT of Delhi vide notification dated 31.01.2013, constituted the Committee for regulating the fee structure for privately managed institutions for academic year 201316. The GNCT of Delhi vide notification dated 19.02.2016, notified the fee recommended for academic years 2013 2016, 20142017, 20142018, and 20142019. The previous fee CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 2/7 structure (mentioned in notification dated 19.02.2016) was rescinded vide another notification dated 10.03.2016. Due to the conduct of Government in issuing notification dated 10.03.2016, the plaintiff college along with other colleges/institutions filed a writ petition before Hon'ble Delhi High Court. During pendency of the same, the GNCT of Delhi vide notification dated 04.07.2016, allowed the plaintiff college and other colleges to charge the enhanced fees for academic session 20162017. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide judgment dated 31.08.2017 allowed the writ petition and plaintiff college and other colleges were allowed to charge enhanced fees for the academic session 20142015 and 201516. The Division Bench of Hon'ble Delhi High Court vide judgment dated 28.01.2019, partly allowed the appeals filed by some students and colleges/institutions were allowed to charge the enhanced fees for the academic session 201516 and not for 201416. Few students against this order, filed the SLP before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which was dismissed vide order dated 22.04.2019. Thereafter, some students filed a review petition which was dismissed vide order dated 01.08.2019. Thereafter, the plaintiff college vide its letter dated 25.02.2019, notice dated 22.03.2019 and notice dated 01.04.2019 called upon the defendant to pay outstanding amount of Rs. 50,400/. Despite several reminders, the defendant neither CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 3/7 replied nor paid the enhanced fees. Thereafter, plaintiff served a legal notice dated 11.06.2019 upon defendant but same was not complied with so far. Hence, the present suit.
2. The summons were issued to the defendant which were duly served through email, however, none had appeared on behalf of defendant and accordingly, defendant was proceeded exparte vide order dated 18.08.2022.
TRIAL
3. Sh. Sanjiv Sharma, i.e. the AR/Public Relation Officer of plaintiff college has examined himself by way of evidence affidavit, Ex. PW 1/A bearing his signature at points 'A' & 'B'. He has also proved the following documents : Exhibit Nos.
S.No. Description of documents Ex. PW 1/1 Authorization letters from Rishi Aurobindo
1. (Colly.) Educational Society (2 pages) Copy of admission verification Form submitted Ex. PW 1/2 by the defendant and application form dated
2. (colly.) (OSR) 03.08.2015.
(3 pages) CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 4/7 Copy of notification no. F. DHE4(45)/2007 3. Ex. PW 1/3 08/6962/493748 dated 31.01.2013.
4. Copy of notification dated 19.02.2016. Ex. PW 1/4
5. Copy of notification dated 10.03.2016. Ex. PW 1/5
6. Copy of judgment dated 31.08.2017. Ex. PW 1/6
7. Copy of judgment dated 28.01.2019. Ex. PW 1/7 Copy of order dated 22.04.2019 passed in SLP 8. Ex. PW 1/8 no. 9248 of 2019.
Copy of order dated 01.08.2019 passed in 9. Ex. PW 1/9 review petition (Civil) Diary no. 23609 of 2019.
Ex. PW 1/1010. Copy of letter dated 25.02.2019 and notice (colly.) (3 dated 01.04.2019.
pages) Ex. PW 1/11 Copy of legal notice dated 11.06.2019 and copy
11. (Colly.) (6 of reminder notice dated 13.11.2019.
pages) Certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act) (not
12. mentioned in evidence affidavit) with respect to Ex. PW 1/12 Ex. PW 1/3 to Ex. PW 1/10).
4. The PW1 has not been crossexamined since the defendant remained exparte.
5. No further PW was examined and the PE was finally closed on 18.10.2022.
CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 5/7
6. I have heard the final arguments and perused the judicial record.
7. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant did not pay the enhanced fees. It is further its case that the defendant has not paid the enhanced fee despite receiving legal notice and reminder. The abovesaid facts have been duly proved by the plaintiff college on the basis of above mentioned documents proved in evidence.
8. As defendant was already proceeded ex parte and the PW1 was not cross examined, hence, the averments of the plaint and evidence of PW1 remained intact, unchallenged and uncontroverted.
9. The suit is within the period of limitation as well as within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court.
10. In view of the abovesaid, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed against defendant for a sum of Rs. 50,400/ alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 9% p.a. from 25.02.2019 till date of realization. Although, plaintiff has prayed for 18% interest CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 6/7 per annum but that seems to be exorbitant. The plaintiff is also awarded the costs of the suit.
11. Decree sheet be accordingly prepared. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the Open Court on 07.11.2022 (VIRENDER SINGH) SCJCUMRC, NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURT, DELHI It is certified that this judgment contains 07 pages and every page is signed by me.
(VIRENDER SINGH) SCJCUMRC, NORTH DISTRICT, ROHINI COURT, DELHI CS No. 97/2021 Chandraprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies & School of Law Vs. Mayank Garg 7/7