Pranav B Prem

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, comprising Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President) and Mr. B.M. Sharma (Member), has held BYJU’s liable for deficiency in service after the EdTech company failed to provide the complete educational package promised to the complainant and also refused to refund the amount despite a timely cancellation request.

Also Read: Unauthorized UPI Withdrawals: SBI Faulted for Non-Compliance With RBI Guidelines by Chandigarh Commission

The case was initiated by Dr. Rajesh Tayal, who had purchased a four-year study package for his daughter, covering Classes 9 to 12 along with NEET preparation, live classes, books, and a Samsung tablet. The package—initially priced at ₹1,68,000—was offered to him at a reduced rate of ₹80,000. Relying on the representations made by BYJU’s counsellor, the complainant paid the entire amount between 8 and 9 November 2022.

However, instead of receiving the extensive study material and tablet as promised, the complainant was delivered only two SD cards for Classes 10 and 11. The Class 9 content, tablet, live classes, and printed books were not provided. Despite repeated calls and messages, BYJU’s failed to resolve the issue, prompting the complainant to send a cancellation and refund request on 15 November 2022—well within what he believed was the permissible time. A tablet was eventually delivered in January 2023, but even then, live classes were never activated, rendering the device unusable for the intended purpose.

Also Read: Delhi State Consumer Commission: Parsvnath Developers Directed To Refund ₹4 Lakh With Interest For Failing To Deliver Flat In Greater Noida Project

BYJU’s argued that the refund request was made after the expiry of the 15-day trial/refund window and claimed that the complainant had failed to provide bank details necessary for processing the refund—contentions found to be unsubstantiated by the Commission. The Commission observed that BYJU’s produced no evidence to show either that the complainant’s bank details were missing or that any genuine effort was made to process the refund. Instead, the company’s stance appeared evasive and unsupported by documents.

The Commission relied on established rulings of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), which consistently hold that private coaching centres cannot retain fees when services are not rendered or when the consumer seeks withdrawal due to non-delivery or inadequacy of services. Since BYJU’s is not an accredited educational institution but a private coaching service, it is legally obligated to refund fees for services it failed to provide.

Finding a clear case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the Commission held that BYJU’s actions caused unnecessary inconvenience, frustration, and academic disruption to the complainant’s daughter. It further remarked that the complainant had acted promptly and reasonably, while BYJU’s had failed to honour its commitments or issue the refund without valid justification.

Also Read: Chandigarh Consumer Commission Holds Atulaya Healthcare Liable for Negligently Uploading Wrong Covid-19 Positive Report on ICMR Portal

Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed BYJU’s to refund the entire amount of ₹80,000 with 9% interest from the date of deposit until realisation. Additionally, BYJU’s was ordered to pay ₹20,000 as compensation and litigation costs. The EdTech company is required to comply with these directions within 45 days of receiving the certified copy of the order.

Cause Title: Dr. Rajesh Tayal vs. BYJU's & Ors.

Case No: DC/AB1/44/CC/472/2023

Coram: Mr. Amrinder Singh Sidhu (President), Mr. B.M. Sharma (Member)