Back
CC 10/2021
Date of filing :04.08.2021
Date of order :17.12.2021
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL
COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
C.C.NO. : 10 OF 2021
Chate Tutorials Private Limited,
Through its Managing Directors,
Mr.Gopichand Hanumantrao Chate,
Chate Tutorials Private Limited,
Gut No.98, Renuka Mata Mandir Road,
Satara Parisar, Aurangabad.
…COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
1. SCHOOLNET,
Schoolnet India Ltd.,
(Formerly IL & FS Education & Technology
Service Ltd.),
NTBCL Building, Toll Plaza, DND Flyway,
NOIDA-201301
Uttar Pradesh.
2. M/s IL & FS Education & Technology
Services Ltd.,
NTBCL Building, DND Flyway,
NOIDA-201301,
Uttar Pradesh (India).
…OPPONENTS
CORAM : Smt.S.T.Barne, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial
Member.
Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.
Present : Adv.M.B.Ubale for complainant.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 17/12/2021)
Per Mr.K.M.Lawande, Hon’ble Member.
1. The consumer complaint is filed by the complainant on 30.07.2021
alleging deficiency in service from opponent. The matter was kept for
CC 10/2021
hearing before admission. The learned advocate Shri.Ubale was heard and
was given time to explain the case from time to time. Lastly on 21.10.2021
he was heard on the point of pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission in
view of Sec.47 of Consumer Protection Act 2019. He sought time to explain
his case to 30.11.2021. However, on 30.11.2021 the advocate remained
absent. The matter is kept for order on admission.
2. It is submitted by the learned advocate Shri.Ubale earlier on
21.10.2021 that the complainant is private limited renowned in educational
classes in the State. They intended to purchase certain digital technology in
the name of K-Van+Contest +VC Licenses. It included to provide VC
application with cloud base 50 licenses(Two way), including K-class
Maharashtra State Board content for standards 8to 10 and K-Class CBSE
content for standard 8to 12. The agreement was entered into between the
parties on 06.03.2017. The complainant has placed the order for 75 K-Van
materials and 50 VC applications. Total price was decided as 97.20 lacs.
The complainant paid, i) Rs.1,10,000/- through cheque No.96424
dt.15.09.2019 and ii) Issued 31 cheques of different amounts of total
Rs.97,20,000/- towards security. It was agreed between the parties that
complainant will pay amounts in instalments through RTGS/NEFT after
launching of successful services by opponent. The complainant has so far
paid Rs.14 lacs to the opponent. However, the opponent has failed to provide
successful services, not provided contents of M.S. Board and CBSE
syllabus(video conferencing services). Due to non-providing of the agreed
services by opponent, students had left the tuition classes and not deposited
CC 10/2021
the remaining fees. The complainant sustained loss of Rs.6,25,17,660/-.
The complainant also seeking compensation of Rs.1 Crore for harassment,
Rs.1 Crore for defamation, loss of goodwill, total Rs.8,25,17,660/-.
3. From the contention of complainant in the complaint it appears that
complainant had paid Rs.14 lacs. Also agreed to purchase is also of
Rs.97.20 lacs. The Sec. 47 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 provides
pecuniary jurisdiction of State Commission where value of consideration
paid for purchase of goods or services exceed Rs.1 crore up to Rs.10 crore.
In the case in hand, consideration paid is below Rs.One crore.
4. Hence the matter cannot be admitted on the point of pecuniary
jurisdiction of this Commission. Therefore , in the case in hand , it appears
that the complainant has wrongly chosen higher Forum for adjudication.
Therefore, it is desirable in the interest of justice to return the complaint
with directions to complainant to file it before appropriate Forum. Hence the
order.
O R D E R
1. This consumer complaint be returned to the complainant for proper
presentat
