February 25, 2009 3:29:45 am
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has directed a private educational institute,Apex College,to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation for indulging in unfair trade practices. The Periyar Institute of Distance Education (PRIDE) in Salem has also been directed to separately pay Rs 25,000 as compensation for causing harassment to the complainant. The institute has also been asked to refund the fee taken from the complainant for providing study material,prospectus and coaching.
Devinder Singh Jamwal stated he had approached the coordinator of Apex International College in Sector 38 with a view to obtain a Masters Degree in English. He was supplied a prospectus on a payment of Rs 130 and was assured that all the study material of MA (English) would be provided to him by the Apex College and PRIDE.
Jamwal then submitted demand drafts of Rs 1,942 in favour of Director PRIDE payable at Salem and another draft amounting to Rs 748 in favour of Coordinator,Apex Education Group,payable at Chandigarh. The complainant alleged that no study material was supplied to him and no classes were conducted. He waited for a period of one year and,thereafter,requested the institute to refund his money,but his requests were not considered. Finally,he moved the consumer forum.
Denying the allegations,Apex International College said classes commenced on 26 July,2008,and continued till 24 August,2008,every weekend. Examinations for all courses under the Distance Education Stream were held from 25 August,2008,till 14 September,2008,but the complainant did not appear in the examinations. Moreover,they had also dispatched the study material at the correspondence address of the complainant.
Further,PRIDE stated that after paying the initial fee,the complainant did not pay the remaining dues for completing the course. It was submitted that the complainant was admitted in the university on December 4,2007,and the study materials were dispatched by them to the study centres on December 11,2007.
The forum said the college has not produced any evidence to suggest that the complainant had received the study material. Moreover,if the examination was scheduled to be held in September 2008,the complainant cannot be expected to wait till July 2008 for study material. It should have been delivered promptly after admission. The mere fact that the complainant chose not to attend the classes does not absolve the institute of their liability because by then the complainant had decided to take admission in another university, forum said.
National Insurance Company to pay up for rejecting claim
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has directed the National Insurance Company to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation for indulging in unfair trade practices and shell out Rs 35,311 claim to the complainant.
The complainant,Ganpati Brick Traders,through its proprietor Balbir Garg,purchased a policy in December 2006 for an Indica car after paying a premium of Rs 8,953. The vehicle was involved in an accident and given for repairs at Joshi Auto Zone. The car dealer delivered the vehicle after a week on a payment of Rs 9,500 and took Gargs signatures on a few documents to lodge the claim.
In February 2007,the dealer recalled the complainant along with the vehicle,which was detained by him on the pretext that the insurance company has rejected the claim. The dealer stated that the vehicle will be released only after receiving Rs 35,000 from the complainant. Alleging harassment at the hands of the dealer as well as the insurance company,Garg moved the consumer forum. In its reply,the National Insurance Company said the claim was rightly repudiated and in accordance with terms and conditions of the policy. The firm pleaded that the claim was rejected as the complainant had wrongly claimed a No Claim Bonus by making a false representation. The complainant had reported a claim to the Oriental Insurance Company,with regard to an earlier insurance policy of the vehicle, stated the firms counsel.
No representative of the Joshi Auto Zone was present in court and,hence,the case against it proceeded ex-parte.
Announcing the verdict,the forum observed: The assertion that the complainant had claimed compensation from another firm could be proved by producing the claim application,which was not done in this case. The National Insurance Company has not produced the surveyors report of the accident either. If the Oriental Insurance Company had sent a cheque to the complainant,the copies thereof have not been produced. The result is that there is no evidence to prove that the complainant had reported any claim and if any compensation was paid to him. It appears that the claim was repudiated by the company in the most frivolous and negligent manner without adhering to the minimum norms required.
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.