Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Principal, L.D.R.P. Institute of Technology And Research Vs Apoorv Sharma (NCDRC)
Appeal Number : Revision Petition No. 2006 of 2019
Date of Judgement/Order : 11/10/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : NCDRC/SCDRC
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Principal, L.D.R.P. Institute of Technology And Research Vs Apoorv Sharma (NCDRC)

Conclusion: In present facts of the case, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission observed that Educational matters do not come within the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and therefore Educational Institute would also not fall within the purview of it.

Facts: In the present case, the Revision Petition has been filed against the Order dated 01.07.2019, passed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Ahmedabad, by which the State Commission has refused to condone the delay of 63 days in filing the Appeal, preferred by the Petitioner Institute. The Appeal had been filed against the Order dated 11.12.2018, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gandhinagar (hereinafter referred to as the District Commission), whereby the District Commission had partly allowed the Complaint, filed by the Complainant/Respondent herein, and directed the Opposite Party, the Petitioner herein, to pay Rs.20,000/- with interest @ 9% from the date of deposit of fee within 30 days as also Rs.2,500/- as compensation for harassment suffered.

In the said case, in the Gujarat Common Entrance Test, the Complainant/Respondent herein had been allotted the Course of Electronics and Communication Engineering in the Petitioner Institute. The Complainant/Respondent deposited the Tuition Fee of Rs.20,000/-. However, subsequently the Complainant/Respondent neither participated in the admission procedure nor submitted any documents nor appeared for verification thereof, which was a mandatory requirement for confirmation of admission. The Complainant/ Respondent withdrawn the seat allotted to him before completion of admission procedure and commencement of new session of the Petitioner Institute. The Complainant/Respondent sent request to cancel his admission and refund the fee deposited. But the fees was not refunded by the Petitioner Institute.

The Hon’ble Commission after taking submissions of both sides into consideration condoned the delay of 63 days in filing the Appeal.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

One Comment

  1. Suman Aich says:

    May I know how can I go for remedy of not getting security deposit back from the school.

    Thanks and regards,
    Suman Kalyan Aich

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031