MR. HARSHAL KIRIT KOTHARI. v. KOOKABURRA EDUCATION PVT LTD.

WhatsApp message dated 06.08.2019 sent him the fee structure. In order to secure the admission, the complainant has paid entire fees in advance as demanded by the opposite party. The complainant paid the fees in manner shown in following table;

B. The complainant pleaded that, Opposite Party has directed to pay the fees

through pay order in the name of Kookabura Education Pvt. Ltd. The

school was supposed to open in June 2020, however, the complainant has

paid entire fees prior to opening of school for the academic year 2020-

2021 4. The complainant pleaded that I paid the entire fees as demanded

by the Opposite Party.

C. It is pleaded that, due to Covid-19 pandemic the pre-school/playgroup did

not open for the academic year 2020-2021 for which entire fees are paid in

advance. It is pleaded that the Opposite Party made a WhatsApp message

dated 20.06.2020 and informed the complainant to collect the learning

packet from the Opposite Party and to teach the child at home. Before

taking the admission complainant had gone through the website of the

Opposite Party www.kookaburra.co.in and further read its internal page

http://www.kookaburra.co.in/program.html The Opposite Party has

3

described in its site "All the teaching techniques employed at KOOKABURRA are based on research. Every child is beautifully unique and we would like nothing more than to help them build on their strengths, as a result equipping them with the tools required to overcome their weaknesses too".

D. The complainant requested for refund of the amount of fees paid to the opposite party as the school/play group did not open. The complainant and his wife followed up with opposite party for getting refund but in vain and therefore complainant sent notice through his advocate dated 01/07/2020 and reminder dt. 27/07/2020 requesting refund of school fees Rs.3,07,500/-, the opposite party through their reply dt. 22/07/2020 refused to refund the school fees stating that "fees once paid to preschool will not be refunded or transferred under any circumstances."

E. It is pleaded that, complainant was not invited for the Orientation Programme organised by the opposite party as he had not collected the learning kit and also sent notice through advocate. Except for the complainant, the opposite party had informed other parents about starting school as parents require their help and on parent's responsibility, this message was not sent to the complainant.

F. On admission and issuance of notice to the opposite parties, the opposite party did not appear and also failed to file its written statement. Therefore, this complaint proceeded ex parte against them.

4

3. On perusal of pleadings, evidence and documents, we framed the following point of issues to arrive at proper conclusion.

4. FINDINGS

As regards to point of issue no. a : - The complainant has produced a receipt for payment of school fees which clearly proves that the complainant has paid the school fees for admission of his daughter to opposite party school. Payment receipts issued by school is direct evidence with regard to hiring of services of the opposite party. Therefore we answer this point of issue in affirmative.

As regards to point of issue no. b : -

On perusal of receipts issued by the opposite party with regards to payment of school fees, it is proved that services of school were hired by the complainant for admission of the complainant's daughter in the playgroup

5

section. It is also proved that, due to covid-19 pandemic started in March 2020 and due to lockdown the school was not started. Considering the age of the complainant's daughter and covid-19 pandemic situation in the entire country, as per guidelines issued by the then government there were restrictions put on movement of people. Providing a learning kit will not suffice the purpose of school. It is proved that the opposite party has failed to provide the school services to the complainant's daughter and that this fact is not denied by the opposite party, hence considered as admitted. Therefore the opposite party is guilty of deficiency of service.

The opposite party in its reply dt. 22/07/2020 to complainant's notice stated that, "fees once paid to preschool will not be refunded or transferred under any circumstances.", this condition itself is unlawful and arbitrary, therefore proves unfair trade practice of the opposite party. Thus we answer this point of issue in affirmative.

As regards to point of issue no. c : -

It is proved that the opposite party is guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The complainant without getting school services from the opposite party had to struggle to get a refund of fees paid, which proved mental agony to him as well as his daughter. The complainant has proved fees paid and not refunded back by the opposite party, therefore complainant proved his entitlement for refund of fees alongwith interest for opportunity loss. Further the complainant has provided mental agony and harassment, therefore the complainant also proved his entitlement for compensation and cost. In view of the above, we order as follows; since the entire pleading is in English language, therefore, we passed the order accordingly.

6

ORDER

1. The complaint is partly allowed.

2. The opposite party is held guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

3. The opposite party shall pay to complainant Rs. 3,07,500/- alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till the date of acutal and full realisation.

4. The opposite party shall pay to complainant Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony.

5. The opposite party shall pay to complainant Rs.10,000/- towards cost of this complaint.

6. The opposite party shall comply with this order within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

7. Provide free certified copy of this order to both the parties. Date :- 01/09/2025

Place :- Bandra - Mumbai.

Sd/- Sd/-

(Sameer S. Kamble) (Samindara R. Surve)

Member President

7