Skip to main content

College to pay Rs 50K to girl for holding back certificates

The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum has directed the M O P Vaishnav College for Women in Chennai to refund tuition fee amounting to 28,430 with 9% interest to a student for having withheld her original certificates for two years. In its order, issued in the month of May, the forum also directed the college to pay 20,000 as compensation for mental agony caused to the student and another 2,000 as cost to be paid to her father.

Nithyusha, daughter of K L N Phani, got admission for the MA Visual Communication course in the college, but discontinued after nine days. Dr Phani, a senior scientist at CSIR-Central Electrochemical Research Institute in Karaikudi, lives in Kumaran Nagar, Trichy.

Phani paid a fee of 29,430 to get his daughter into the course in July 2011. Nithyusha discontinued her studies after she fell ill due to food poisoning in the hostel. When Phani requested the institution to return the original certificates and refund the tuition fee, it demanded that the entire course fee be paid in advance in return for the original certificates.

When Phani went in person, he was not allowed to meet either the principal or the vice-principal. He was later told by the management he could either telephone or email them, but got no replies. Phani then sought the help of the Consumer Protection Council of Tamil Nadu, Trichy, which wrote a letter to the principal highlighting the UGC and ministry of human resource development norms that stipulated that only 1,000 must be retained when students leave the institution, and on no account can their certificates be withheld. When the college remained uncooperative, the council filed a complaint before the district consumer forum in Chennai.

 Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-08-06/chennai/41130522_1_certificates-food-poisoning-trichy

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more