ORDER

1.         The present Revision Petition (RP) has been filed by the Petitioner(s) against Respondent(s) as detailed above, under section 21 (b) of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 19.7.2018  of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’), in First Appeal (FA) No. 586/2017 in which order dated 03.01.2017 District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban Distt. (hereinafter referred to as District Commission) in Consumer Complaint (CC) No.54/2015 was challenged, inter alia praying for directing the Respondent to refund Rs.26,986/- paid to the respondent as fees for advance Squash Coaching.

2.         While the Revision Petitioner(s) (hereinafter also referred to as Complainant) was Appellant before the State Commission and Complainant before the District Forum, the Respondent (hereinafter also referred to as Opposite Party) was Respondent before the State Commission and Opp. Party before the District Forum.  

3.         Notice was issued to the Respondent(s) on 1.10.2021.  Parties filed Written Arguments/ Synopsis on 22.01.2023 (Petitioner) and 04.09.2023 (Respondent) respectively.

4.         Brief facts of the case, as emerged from the RP, Order of the State Commission, Order of the District Commission and other case records are that: -

(i)        On 01.01.2014, OP Chembur Gymkhana invited Complainant through their notice board for joining the advanced coaching, in squash promising qualified professional coaches and imparting of advanced training techniques for players.  He joined the advance coaching sessions from 16.1.2014 on payment of monthly fees of Rs.3371 till 17.9.2014 wherein thereafter complainant was asked to leave the said course as he had brought to opponent’s notice the deficiencies in service.  Complainant had paid sum of Rs.26,986/- for coaching to the OP for which he was issued receipts by OP.

(ii)       As per the complainant, some of the deficiencies noticed by him as follows:

Complainant further submitted that he brought the said deficiencies to the notice of OP vide his complaints dated 21.6.2014 and 4.10.2014 and several oral requests and complaints but no corrective action was taken by OP. Complainant therefore filed Consumer Complaint before the District Forum.

5.         Vide Order dated 3.1.2017 in the CC no. 54 of 2015 the District Commission has dismissed the complaint and passed the following order :

            (i)        The complainant has failed to prove that the coaches appointed by the OP were not having experience requisite for becoming a coach.  He attended the coaching and after six months in June 2014 stated that OP Gymkhana is one of the finest squash court. There is no evidence regarding deficiency of service or unfair trade practice as alleged by complainant.

            (ii)       The   complainant availed service rendered by Chembur Gymkhana therefore he cannot claim refund of fees. The Managing Committee of Trust is empowered to manage the affairs and to take appropriate action for promotion of objects of trust.  We cannot legally direct opponent to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and cost of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant, as we do not find any deficiency in service. Hence, the Consumer complaint is dismissed.

6.         Aggrieved by the said Order dated 3.1.2017 of District Commission, Petitioner(s) appealed in State Commission and the State Commission vide order dated 19.7.2018 in FA No. 586 of 2017 has partly allowed the Appeal and ordered as under :

“(i)      The Appeal No.586/2017 is partly allowed.

(ii)       The order of District Forum in consumer complaint No.54 of 2015 is set aside.

          (iii)     Opponent is declared guilty of deficiency in service.

         (iv)       The Consumer Complaint No.54/2015 filed by complainant is partly allowed.

(v)       Opponent is directed to pay Rs.6,000/-  to the complainant towards  missing sessions with simple interest @ 6% p.a