Education is not a commodity; fee to be refunded if student quits: Court to school

News Network
November 9, 2017

Bengaluru, Nov 9: “Education is not a commodity but a pious service rendered to humanity," a city consumer court told a Bengaluru school, asking it to pay Rs 51,000 to a parent who had pulled his daughter out of the school's kindergarten after paying an admission fee of Rs 55,000.

It all began after Brookefield resident Thejas John Philipose decided to withdraw a kindergarten admission he had secured for his daughter at Euro School Foundation, Whitefield, by paying an admission fee of Rs 55,000 on Nov 7, 2015.

Stating that he was transferred on work to Kerala and was relocating, Philipose cancelled the admission for academic year 2016 in March itself and demanded a refund of the fee paid. The authorities, however, refused to refund the so-called `non-refundable' admission fee.

A helpless Philipose approached the Bengaluru Rural and Urban 1st Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on April 29, 2016 with a complaint against the school authorities.

The court heard arguments from the parent and the education institution represented by its principal. While Philipose demanded a refund, alleging un fair trade practices by the school, the Euro School representative averred that Philipose had signed a declaration, stating that 'fees once paid will not be refunded' before seeking admission for his daughter and that the clause was clearly mentioned in the school admission brochure. The litigation lasted nearly 18 months, at the end of which the court came down heavily on Euro School Foundation.

It asserted that a school brochure and its conditions can't be treated as an agreement or a contract for the admission of a child. "Education is not something one should sell in the open market, whereas providing it is a pious service rendered to humanity," the court said.

It added that a child's school admission is not a business transaction and thus a signature on a declaration of `non-refundable fee' doesn't hold value, especially in a situation where a parent has sought refund well in advance before the commencement of the academic year. In Philipose's case, the refund was requested in March 2016 while KG classes were scheduled to commence only in June.

The court ordered Euro School Foundation to refund Rs 50,000 from the admission fee paid after deducting a sum of Rs 5,000 towards school administration charges. The school was further asked to pay the parent Rs 1,000 towards litigation charges.

Comments

Rahul
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

Medical students courses are much expensive so they have to take back from others.

AK Shetty
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

True. But other students (Medical) should consider they are doing service. They are taking much more money from patients

Suresh Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

Wise words - “Education is not a commodity but a pious service rendered to humanity,"

Hari
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

Many colleges in Karnataka still not refunding to students

Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

True.We welcome this decision

Ganesh
 - 
Thursday, 9 Nov 2017

Most wanted judgement

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 8,2020

Shivamogga, Jun 8: Tyavarekoppa Tiger and Lion Safari in Shivamogga re-opened on Monday at 9 am.

Zoo authorities said that they are ensuring that all standard operating procedures are being followed, including ensuring social distancing and wearing of masks by visitors.

It is being ensured that pairs of birds are being kept inside enclosures.

Regular sweeping and spraying on the premises are also being taken care of, authorities said.

Floor markings have been made at the ticket counter to maintain social distancing.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 2,2020

The Ayodhya police booked a senior journalist on Wednesday for raising questions on Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath's visit to the Ram Janmabhoomi for a religious ceremony amid the lockdown over the novel coronavirus pandemic.

The FIR mentions a tweet by Siddharth Varadarajan, editor of news portal 'The Wire', where he said: "On the day the Tablighi Jamaat event was held, Adityanath insisted a large Ram Navami fair planned for Ayodhya from March 25 to April 2 would proceed as usual and that 'Lord Ram would protect devotees from the coronavirus."

Varadarajan had clarified in another tweet that it was "Acharya Paramhans, Hindutva stalwart and head of the official Ayodhya temple trust, who said Ram would protect devotees from coronavirus, and not Adityanath, though he allowed a public event on 25/3 in defiance of the lockdown and took part himself".

Taking the suo-motu cognizance, Faizabad Kotwali police station incharge Nitish Kumar Shrivastava registered an FIR under sections 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) and 505(2) (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code for doing "disreputable" comment against the chief minister.

Statement by the Founding Editors of The Wire: pic.twitter.com/frw5oRxw18

— The Wire (@thewire_in) April 1, 2020
Reacting to it, Varadarajan termed the FIR "politically motivated, saying that the offences invoked were not even remotely made out.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 8,2020

Mumbai, Feb 8: Anil Ambani, the brother of Asia’s richest man has pleaded poverty in his dispute with three Chinese banks seeking $680 million in defaulted loans.

“The value of my investments has collapsed,” Anil Ambani said, according to a court filing by the banks in a London lawsuit.

“The current value of my shareholdings is down to approximately $82.4m and my net worth is zero after taking into account my liabilities. In summary, I do not hold any meaningful assets which can be liquidated for the purposes of these proceedings.”

The lawsuit was filed by three state-controlled Chinese banks which argue that they provided a loan of $925 million to Ambani’s Reliance Communications Ltd. in 2012 with the condition that he personally guarantee the debt. The comments were disclosed on Friday as Ambani sought to avoid depositing hundreds of millions of dollars with the court ahead of a trial.

The embattled Indian tycoon says that while he agreed to give a non-binding “personal comfort letter,” he never gave a guarantee tied to his personal assets -- an “extraordinary potential personal liability.”

The 60-year-old is the brother of Mukesh Ambani, who’s worth $56.5 billion and is the wealthiest man in Asia. Anil, on the other hand, has seen his personal fortune dwindle over recent years, losing his billionaire status. His Reliance Communications filed for bankruptcy last year.

The banks asked Judge David Waksman to force Ambani to put up $656 million into the court’s account.

Representatives for Ambani’s Reliance Group said they couldn’t immediately comment. They said the group will issue a statement once the court issues the final order.

Ambani’s lawyer, Robert Howe, said the court shouldn’t order his client to make a payment he can’t make. The tycoon argues that an order requiring him to do so would hinder his ability to defend himself in the case, Howe said.

“There’s no evidence of some giant pot of gold that he can pull $1 million, let alone $10 million, let alone $100 million,” Howe said.

Bankim Thanki, an attorney representing Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China, said in a filing that Ambani’s statements are “plainly a yet further opportunistic attempt to evade his financial obligations to the lenders.”

Ambani was caught up in another legal wrangle last year when India’s Supreme Court threatened him with prison after Reliance Communications failed to pay Rs 5.5 billion ($77 million) to Ericsson AB’s Indian unit. The judges gave him a month to find the funds, and his brother, Mukesh, stepped in just in time to make the payment.

Anil said in a filing that he recognized that the judge would want to know if he could satisfy any order to put up funds from outside resources, including his family.

“I can confirm that I have made enquiries but I am unable to raise any finance from external sources,” he said. Judge Waksman had said in an earlier ruling that he believed Ambani’s defence would be shown to be “opportunistic and false.”

Ambani’s lawyer told the judge that as a result of the comments the tycoon’s relatives were unlikely to lend any funds.

There is a “very substantial risk they will never get it back,” Howe said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.