SURESH KUMAR BARWAL Vs. THE REGISTRAR, H.P. UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is aggrieved by the order dated 19th June, 2012, of learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shimla, whereby his complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which he filed against the respondents, has been dismissed. Appellant's son, Sumeet Barwal took admission in BCA course for the academic session 2009 -2010, in the University College of Business Studies run by the H.P. University. A sum of Rs. 15,000/ - was deposited as fee at the time of admission. Within one month of admission, son of the appellant left the college due to illness. Request was made to the respondents to refund the fee, but the same was turned down. So, a complaint, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, was filed seeking issuance of a direction to the respondents to refund the fee.

(2.) H .P. University impleaded as opposite party through its Registrar, did not put in appearance and was proceeded against ex -parte. Chairman/Director Business Studies, H.P. University, impleaded as opposite party No. 2, did not file any reply. However, written arguments were submitted, in which it was stated that appellant's son had been admitted after the last date of admission with the special permission of the Vice Chancellor and the seat vacated by him remained vacant, so nothing was refundable.

(3.) WE have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record.