Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Coaching centres entitled to charge fee only for services rendered: Commission

Directs Aakash institute to refund fee to student's father
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
Representational photo.
Advertisement

Observing that coaching centres are legally entitled to charge fee only for the services they actually provide to a student, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Aakash Educational Services Limited to refund Rs 10,006  to a city resident.

Advertisement

The commission also directed the centre to pay a compensation of Rs 5,000 to the complainant.

The complainant, SK Verma, said on April 19, 2023, he had contacted the coaching centre at Sector  34 for the admission of his daughter. He was asked to pay Rs 2,000 towards security and Rs 30,091 towards tuition fee as the first instalment of the total fee for the two-year course.

Advertisement

He was asked to visit the next day with his daughter for classes, 15 minutes in advance, being the first day for the collection of study material, etc.

However, when he visited the centre, an employee misbehaved with him. As there was no cooperation from the counsellor and other employees, he decided not to continue with the centre and sought a refund vide a letter.

Advertisement

Later, he also issued a legal notice to the centre, demanding the refund along with interest, but in vain.

The coaching centre, on the other hand, said the complaint was not maintainable and liable to be dismissed as the complainant's daughter, being a student, did not fall under the definition of ‘consumer’. It also said the terms of admission were signed and accepted by the complainant and his daughter, and a clause specifically stated that in the event of any dispute between the parties, the matter shall be referred to the sole arbitrator.

After hearing the arguments, the commission said the complainant’s daughter had not attended any coaching/tuition class and was entitled to a refund as no services had been provided.

The commission said if any child, after enrolling with an institute, withdrew from the course, for whatsoever reason, he could not be penalised by way of forfeiture of entire money.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
'
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper