Back
M.K. Jacob - Appellant
Versus
S.P. Soman and Anr. - Respondent
Decided On : 02/27/1993
Appeal Nos. 84 of 1991 & 108 of 1991
Advocates Appeared :
B. Vijaya Kumar,A. Ashok Kumar,R. Vijaya Mohan,K.K. Johan
Held: The word service as defined in Section 2(o) of the Consumer Protection Act includes services of any description which is made available to potential users and therefore the service rendered by an educational institution which charges heavy fees for the services rendered is the service of the kind defined in Section 2(o) of the Consumer Protection Act. Therefore we are of the opinion that the complainant who had paid the fees to the opposite parties for educating and preparing his son to appear at examination has hired their service for consideration and therefore he is a consumer. (Para 9)
The educational institutions has the right Lo take disciplinary actions against students with a view to lead the student through the right path, but not to destroy their future or to harass them. In this case there is no doubt that the boy was disobedient to his teacher. But we note that subsequently he had written the imposition 50 times and thereby he had shown a sign of repentance. The opposite parties should have taken this aspect into consideration. (Para 13)
But when they insisted the written apology and the disclosure of the names of his co-students who instigated him to write the imposition once instead of 50 times, the disciplinary actions gone beyond limit and converted into harassment which resulted in the unpleasant incidents and the discontinuation of the studies of the boy. In our opinion this amounts deficiency in the service rendered by the opposite parties. In the circumstance we do not see any ground to disagree with the finding of the District Forum. (Para 13)
IMPORTANT POINT
The educational institutions has the right to take disciplinary actions against students with a view to lead the student through the right path but not to destroy their future or to harass them.
C.G. Sethulakshmi, Member - These two appeals arc in the nature of cross appeals, have been filed against the order of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Emakulam dated 14.5.1991 in EKM OP No. 614190. The Appellants in Appeal No. 84/91 were the opposite panics before the District Forum and the Appellant in Appeal No. 108191 was the complainant be for the District Forum.
2. The allegation of the complainant before the District Forum was that his Son Binu Jacob aged 17Yz years was admitted to Skilteck Computer Centre for one year DPCS Course on September 17th 1990 and was forced to leave the course due to the harassment and torture of the opposite parties. The 1st opposite party is the Director General and the 2nd opposite party is the teacher of the Skilteck computer centre, Cochin, The 2nd opposite party sent out the complainant's son from the class for writing imposition once instead of 50 times. On 28.11.1990 when his son wrote imposition for 50 times and handed over to the 2nd opposite party he was not admitted to the class room, instead he was directed by the 2nd opposite party to meet the 1st opposite party. After a joint meeting of the complainant, the opposite parties, Mr. Zachariah Course Director and Mr.
Girish(teacher) the 1st opposite party assured to readmit his son by 3.12.1990. The complainant's son reported to the 2nd opposite party on 3.12.1990 when he was asked to tender a written apology which his son obeyed. The 2nd opposite party then asked the boy to disclose the names of those students who had insisted him to write imposition only once which he refused as he expected some retaliation from the students contrary to the assurance made in the joint discussion 'the complainant's son was denied admission to the class room and the repeated request to the 1st opposite party did not change the situation and on 17.12.1990 the 1st opposite party totally refused admission and advised the complainant to withdraw his son from the course. Therefore, he filed a complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal District Forum claiming the refund of Rs.4740/- which he paid towards the total fee for the full year, the return of Transfer certificate, Rs.30,000/- as compensation for loss of one year and Rs.5000/- as compensation for harassing and torturing his son which caused severe shock and paid. The District Forum passed an order directing the 1st opposite party to refund Rs.3795/- the fees collected from the complainant. Aggrieved by this order these two appeals have been filed.
3. The important contention raised by the appellant in appeal No. 84/91 were that the finding of the District Forum that the complainant's son handed over the written apology to the 2nd appellant is not based on any cogent evidence, that the observation of the District Forum that the appellants refused permission to the student to attend classes without reasonable cause is unwarranted, that the finding of the District Forum that the regulations of the institution are without authority or legal sanction is baseless, that the respondent and his son applied for the course completely understanding the regulations, that they have agreed to the condition that they will be liable to remit the complete fees prescribed for the course even if the student leaves the institution without completing the course, that the District Forum should have found that the agreement between the parties disentitle the respondent from claiming any refund of fees or compensation, and that the District Forum having found that the complainant had no complaint as to the infrastructure, carriculam, training standards and faculty of the opposite party's institution should have hold that there was no deficiency in services rendered by the opposite parties and that the complaint is not maintainable.
4. The content;0ns raised by the appellant in appeal No. 108/91 were that the finding of the District Forum that the complainant's son also contributed equally to the state of affai
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
