Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sai Kiran Reddy vs Arindam Choudhary on 5 April, 2018

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 KAR 1810

Author: Vineet Kothari

Bench: Vineet Kothari

                         1/5


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018

                       BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

             W.P.NO.9291/2013(EDN-RES)

BETWEEN

SAI KIRAN REDDY
S/O N SWAMI REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT: 102, 1ST FLOOR,
SAI KIRAN APARTMENTS,
NEW BYAPPANAHALLI EXTENSION,
OLD MADRAS ROAD, INDRANAGAR,
BANGALORE- 560 038
                                          ... PETITIONER

(By Sri. MEGHACHANDRA D N. ADV.(ABSEBT)


AND

1.    ARINDAM CHOUDHARY
      FOUNDER DIRECTOR,
      IIPM CENTER FOR HIGHER EDUCATION,
      LEVEL 4, RECTANGLE-1, D-4
      BEHIND SELECT CITY WALK,
      SAKET DISTRICT CENTRE,
      NEW DELHI-110 017

2.    INDIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNING
      AND MANAGEMENT,
      IIPM TOWER, 419,
      100FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA,
      BANGALORE- 560 034
      REP BY ITS DEAN, BALACHANDRA
                        Date of Order:05-04-2018 W.P.No.9291/2013
                         Sai Kiran Reddy Vs. Arindam Choudhary & Ors.

                         2/5



3.   MANONMANIAM SUNDARANAR UNIVERSITY
     TIRUNELVELI,
     TAMIL NADU- 627012
     REP BY ITS REGISTRAR

4.   UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION
     BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG,
     NEW DELHI- 110002
     REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN

5.   ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION
     7TH FLOOR,CHANDERLOK BUILDING,
     JANPATH, NEW DELHI- 110 001
     REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN

                                             ... RESPONDENTS


(By SRI RAMAKRISHNA SRINIVASAN, ADV. FOR R3
      MS.SONA M. BADIGER, ADV. FOR R5,
      R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT TO REIMBURSE THE MONEY PAID

BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE EDUCATIONAL FEES

ALONG WITH ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR THE DAMAGE

CAUSED TO HIS LIFE, CAREER AND PROSPECTS.



     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                            Date of Order:05-04-2018 W.P.No.9291/2013
                              Sai Kiran Reddy Vs. Arindam Choudhary & Ors.

                              3/5




                           ORDER

Mr.Meghachandra D.N. Adv. for Petitioner-Absent Mr.Ramakrishna Srinivasan, Adv. for R3 Ms.Sona M. Badiger, Adv. for R5 None present for the petitioner. None present for the respondents.

2. Perused the records.

3. The prayers made by the petitioner- student, who joined the Respondent No.2- Institution namely Indian Institute of Planning and Management, IIPM Tower, Bengaluru, in MBA course in this writ petition for directing Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to refund the 'Tuition Fees' paid by the petitioner to the Respondent-Institution.

4. The prayers made in this writ petition are quoted below for ready reference:

Date of Order:05-04-2018 W.P.No.9291/2013 Sai Kiran Reddy Vs. Arindam Choudhary & Ors.
4/5
(a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondent to reimburse the money paid by the petitioner towards the educational fees along with adequate compensation for the damage caused to his life, career and prospects in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.
(b) To issue any order or direction that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

5. Considering the averments made in the writ petition, this Court is of the opinion that the present case is a fit case for filing appropriate civil suit for money recovery only, if the petitioner has any cause in the matter and such relief or decree cannot be granted in extraordinary jurisdiction of Date of Order:05-04-2018 W.P.No.9291/2013 Sai Kiran Reddy Vs. Arindam Choudhary & Ors. 5/5 this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. The writ jurisdiction is misconceived remedy in such a case. When several facts have to be proved with relevant evidence, civil suit is the only appropriate remedy.

7. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed with aforesaid liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate civil suit in the matter.

Copy of this order be sent to both sides immediately.

Sd/-

JUDGE TL