Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 154 views

    Sample Consumer Complaint 2019 PYP

    Uploaded by

    Yogesh Byadwal
    1. The complainants, who are students aged 19-22, have filed a complaint against Rajendra Prasad Law School and ABC Parishad for fraudulent misrepresentation in their advertisements and courses. 2. The complainants paid tuition fees to theOpposite Parties for a legal education program for the 2019-20 academic year but theOpposite Parties lied about their affiliations and accreditations. 3. The complaint alleges unfair trade practices, deficiency in service, and unfair contracts by theOpposite Parties in violation of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 and seeks an injunction, compensation of Rs. 19.5 lakhs plus interest, and punitive damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Sample Consumer Complaint 2019 PYP

    Uploaded by

    Yogesh Byadwal
    154 views3 pages
    1. The complainants, who are students aged 19-22, have filed a complaint against Rajendra Prasad Law School and ABC Parishad for fraudulent misrepresentation in their advertisements and courses. 2. The complainants paid tuition fees to theOpposite Parties for a legal education program for the 2019-20 academic year but theOpposite Parties lied about their affiliations and accreditations. 3. The complaint alleges unfair trade practices, deficiency in service, and unfair contracts by theOpposite Parties in violation of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 and seeks an injunction, compensation of Rs. 19.5 lakhs plus interest, and punitive damages.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The complainants, who are students aged 19-22, have filed a complaint against Rajendra Prasad Law School and ABC Parishad for fraudulent misrepresentation in their advertisements and courses. 2. The complainants paid tuition fees to theOpposite Parties for a legal education program for the 2019-20 academic year but theOpposite Parties lied about their affiliations and accreditations. 3. The complaint alleges unfair trade practices, deficiency in service, and unfair contracts by theOpposite Parties in violation of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 and seeks an injunction, compensation of Rs. 19.5 lakhs plus interest, and punitive damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    154 views3 pages

    Sample Consumer Complaint 2019 PYP

    Uploaded by

    Yogesh Byadwal
    1. The complainants, who are students aged 19-22, have filed a complaint against Rajendra Prasad Law School and ABC Parishad for fraudulent misrepresentation in their advertisements and courses. 2. The complainants paid tuition fees to theOpposite Parties for a legal education program for the 2019-20 academic year but theOpposite Parties lied about their affiliations and accreditations. 3. The complaint alleges unfair trade practices, deficiency in service, and unfair contracts by theOpposite Parties in violation of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 and seeks an injunction, compensation of Rs. 19.5 lakhs plus interest, and punitive damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

    COMMISSION, PATNA

    IN RE: 27 of 2022

    IN THE MATTER OF:

    Abhiraj and Ors.


    (M, 20)
    (169, Mahavir Apartments, Patna) ………………………………...Complainant

    v.

    Rajendra Prasad Law School


    (Patna, Bihar) ……………………………………………………...OP1

    and

    ABC Parishad
    (Patna, Bihar) ……………………………………………………...OP2

    COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35/47/58 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION


    ACT, 2019

    RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

    1. That the complainants are aged between 19 and 22 and were seeking admission in
    courses of law.
    2. That the complainants are students who took admission under the fraudulent courses
    created by the Opposite Party 1 (OP1).
    3. That OP1 has been publishing misleading advertisements in national dailies
    concerning BCI certification.
    4. That OP1 has been falsely misrepresenting their ostensible affiliation with Nalanda
    University.
    5. That Opposite Party 2 (OP2) has been governing RLPS and attracting students to their
    course using the abovementioned misrepresentations and falsities.

    TRANSACTION

    1. That the complainants have paid their tuition fee at the time stipulated by OP1 and
    OP2, which can be verified using Transaction IDs AZ1222.
    2. That the fee was paid to OP1 and OP2 for the purposes of legal education promised
    by the OPs for the academic year 2019-20.

    NATURE OF COMPLAINT

    1. That the OPs have outrightly and blatantly lied about their affiliation with Nalanda
    University and association with BCI, constituting an unfair trade practice u/s 2(47)(i)
    (b), (c) and (f) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (Act).
    2. That the requisite education promised by the OPs constitutes a service as defined u/s
    2(42) of the Act, and the omission in conducting examinations within the promised
    period constitutes a deficiency of service u/s 2(11) of the Act.
    3. That the false assurances given by the OPs would be actionable as an unfair contract
    u/s 2(46) of the Act.
    4. That OP1 is not a sovereign body in light of its fraudulent nature and would be
    amenable to the Act.
    5. That the complainants are consumers as defined u/s 2(7) of the Act.

    RECTIFICATION

    1. That the complainants have written priorly to OPs and have received no response.

    CAUSE OF ACTION

    1. That the cause of action for this complaint arises u/s 2(42), 2(46), 2(47) and 2(11) of
    the Act.

    TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION

    1. That the territorial jurisdiction of the present complaint lies in the District of Patna u/s
    34(2)(b) of the Act.

    PECUNIARY JURISDICTION

    1. That the pecuniary jurisdiction of the present complaint lies in the District Consumer
    Disputes Redressal Commission as per the Consumer Protection (Jurisdiction of the
    District Commission, the State Commission and the National Commission) Rules,
    2021, since the total amount of value paid as consideration does not exceed Rs. 50
    lakhs.

    LIMITATION

    1. That the present complaint is being filed within the period prescribed under Section
    69 of the Act.

    COURT FEE

    1. As per Rule 7 of the Consumer Protection (CDRC Rules) 2020, the complainant has
    deposited Rs. 400 via a Demand Draft in the name of the President of the DCDRC,
    Patna.

    PRAYER

    1. Therefore, in light of the facts presented and issues raised, it is humbly prayed that the
    Hon’ble Commission pass an order to the effect:
    a. That OP1 and OP2 be immediately prohibited from engaging in fraudulent
    misrepresentation of their associations via an injunction passed by the
    Commission.
    b. That OP1 and OP2 compensate the complainants for Rs. 19.5 lakhs with an
    interest rate of 8% per annum till the compensation is paid.
    c. That the Commission award punitive damages u/s 39 by virtue of the gravity
    and scale of the fraud being committed by the OPs.
    d. Along with any other relief that the Hon’ble Commission deems fit in the
    interests of justice, equity and good conscience.

    Place: Patna, Bihar


    Date: 2/03/22

    Abhiraj (on behalf of the complainants)

    Verification

    I, Abhiraj, resident of Patna, hereby declare that I have not misrepresented any facts nor have
    tried to hide any information in my above complaint. All the facts mentioned herein are true
    to the best of my knowledge.

    Abhiraj
    Date: 2/03/22

    You might also like