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 43]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Anupama College Of Engineering vs Gulshan Kumar on 30 October, 2017

Bench: Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta

                                         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       CIVIL APPEAL NO. 17802 of 2017
                            (@ Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 17679/2017)


  ANUPAMA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING                                              Appellant(s)

                                                      VERSUS

  GULSHAN KUMAR & ORS.                                                        Respondent(s)

                                                    WITH
                                       CIVIL APPEAL NO. 17803 of 2017
                            (@ Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 17832/2017)


                                                    O R D E R

Leave granted.

The only question raised in this case is whether a college is a service provider for the purposes of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Learned counsel for the appellant has placed the decision of this Court in Maharshi Dayanand University v. Surjeet Kaur [(2010) 11 SCC 159]. The aforesaid decision was followed by this Court in SLP (C) No. 22532/2012 titled as P.T. Koshy & Anr. v. Ellen Charitable Trust & Ors. The order reads as follows:

“In view of the judgment of this Court in Maharshi Dayanand University v. Surjeet Kaur [(2010) 11 SCC 159] wherein this Court placing reliance on all earlier judgments has categorically held that education is not a Signature Not Verified commodity. Educational institutions are not providing Digitally signed by MEENAKSHI KOHLI Date: 2017.11.02 any kind of service, therefore, in matter of admission, 16:56:02 IST Reason: fees etc., there cannot be a question of deficiency of service. Such matters cannot be entertained by the 1 Consumer Forum under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
In view of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the special leave petition. Thus, the special leave petition is dismissed.” In view of the consistent opinion expressed by this Court, the orders passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Revision Petition No. 3571/2013 and Revision Petition No. 807/2017 are not in accordance with the decision of this Court and are therefore set aside. The civil appeals are allowed.
…....................J. [MADAN B. LOKUR] …....................J. [DEEPAK GUPTA] NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 30, 2017.




                                        2
ITEM NO.53                COURT NO.4                  SECTION XVII

                S U P R E M E C O U R T O F       I N D I A
                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)      No(s).   17679/2017

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09-05-2017 in RP No. 3571/2013 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi) ANUPAMA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Petitioner(s) VERSUS GULSHAN KUMAR & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 17832/2017 (XVII) Date : 30-10-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Abhijat P. Medh, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON perusing papers the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The civil appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.



(MEENAKSHI KOHLI)                              (KAILASH CHANDER)
  COURT MASTER                                    COURT MASTER
[Signed order is placed on the file] 3