School
refunds caution money
Tribune
News Service
CHANDIGARH, April 27
Alpine School, Pinjore, has refunded a sum of Rs
30,000 to an NRI student after the intervention by the
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum- I headed by
Dr H.C. Modi.
Earlier in the
complaint, Ms. Poonam Sahota had alleged that she was
admitted by the school in its ninth class for the 1997-98
session under the foreign students of the NRI category.
The requisite tuition fee and other charges had been paid
along with a refundable caution money of $ 1000. Upon
completing the session, she left the school for further
studies in the USA, but the school did not refund any
caution money in spite of several reminders.
The Forum bench
comprising its President, Dr H.C. Modi, and members, Dr
R.K. Behl and Ms Shashi Kanta, issued notice to the
school and directed it to produce the relevant record for
ascertaining the quantum of refund.
On the date of hearing,
the officer of the school informed the court that a sum
of Rs 30,000 had been refunded to the complainant in full
and final satisfaction of her claim. The forum,
therefore, disposed of the complaint as the grievance of
the complainant had been redressed.
Appeal dismissed
The
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh,
comprising its President, Mr J.B. Garg, and members ,Col.
P.K. Vasudeva and Mrs Devinder Jit Dhatt, have dismissed
with costs an appeal filed by a transporter of goods
against the order of the District Forum allowing the
complaint of a consignee.
Earlier, on a complaint
filed by Messrs Micron Instruments Pvt Ltd. against
Messrs Prakash Roadlines Ltd the District Forum had held
the tranporter guilty of having caused loss to the
consignment of the complainant. The forum had found that
the consignment had reached the godown of the transporter
at Chandigarh but a considerable part of the goods were
lost/stolen in the godown. Out of 141 pieces of alloy
ingots weighing 1000 kg, a bulk consisting of 110 pieces
weighing 785 kg was lost while in storage in the godown
of the transporters.
The complainant had put
forward a claim of Rs 61, 810 on account of actual loss,
Rs 50,000 on account of physical and mental harassment,
and Rs 5,000 as cost and interest at the rate of 18 per
cent per annum. After going through the records, the
District Forum had ordered that a sum of Rs 57148 be paid
on account of shortage of material along with interest at
the rate of 12 per cent per annum and costs of Rs 1100.
Against this order, the
tranporters went in appeal before the State Commission.
The commission also held that transporters guilty of
deficiency of service and rejected the plea of the
transporters regarding jurisdiction and the complainant
not being a consumer. It therefore upheld the order of
the District Forum in toto and further imposed costs of
Rs 1100 in respect of the appeal also.
Nigam
fined for inflated bills
Tribune
News Service
PANCHKULA, April 27
The Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam, erstwhile
Haryana State Electricity Board, has been directed by the
local consumer court to pay a compensation of Rs 2,000 to
a Barwala-based consumer for being harassed on account of
being issued an inflated electricity bill.
The order was passed by
the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on a
complaint filed by Mr Sondhi Khan of Rehna village near
here.
Mr Khan, in his
complaint alleged that he had been an electricity
consumer for the last 20 years. During 1992-93, his
electricity meter went dead and since then the power bill
was being issued on an average basis. Even a
representation to replace the defective meter was made to
the authorities.
He further alleged that
he was made to pay four times the money against his
electricity bills and still an additional demand of Rs
4,027 was made from him. He pointed out that an
electricity bill issued in February 1993 showed the units
consumed as 34, but another bill issued in February 1994
showed the units consumed as 100. In another subsequent
bill, the units consumed were increased to 170.
The nigam, in its reply,
said that the complainant never moved an application to
replace the defective electricity meter. It further said
that though the defective meter was replaced in January
1998, the complainant did not make the full payment
against arrears of electricity bills. Moreover, the
complainant did not inform about the increased load from
0.4 KW to 1.126 KW.
The forum, in its order,
observed that the nigam had failed to remove the
defective meter and had issued inflated electricity
bills. The consumer has been allowed Rs 500 as costs of
proceedings.
|