The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Punjab's Gurdaspur district has directed Bengaluru-based Eduinx Education Services Private Limited to refund Rs 84,960 to an MBA graduate after finding that the company failed to establish fulfilment of its advertised "100% guaranteed placement" commitment.
The commission also directed the opposite parties to jointly and severally pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.
The order was passed by President Lalit Mohan Dogra and Member Bhagwan Singh Matharu in a complaint filed by Harish Malhotra of Batala.
MBA Graduate Paid Rs 84,960 For AI Product Management Course
According to the complaint, Malhotra, an MBA graduate, was looking for an employment opportunity matching his qualifications and career aspirations.
He came across an advertisement by Eduinx on July 9, 2025, which represented the programme as offering "100% guaranteed placement". Relying on the representation, he enrolled in a six-month online training programme in AI in Product Management on July 12, 2025.
He paid Rs 84,960 through a credit card towards the course fee.
Malhotra completed the training and received a course completion certificate on November 24, 2025. However, he alleged that the promised placement did not materialise despite repeated follow-ups with the company.
Company Argued That It Provided Placement Assistance
Eduinx disputed the allegations and maintained that it had fulfilled its obligations under the placement-support framework.
The company argued that it was an upskilling and career-support platform and not an appointing authority. According to its defence, the expression "100% Placement Guarantee" referred to career preparation, profile optimisation and employer outreach, while final selection remained dependent on the prospective employer.
The company also relied on WhatsApp conversations to show that recruitment opportunities had been communicated to Malhotra.
These included opportunities in Mumbai, Bengaluru and Hyderabad. The company argued that Malhotra had expressed a preference for employment in Gurugram or Delhi-NCR and had declined opportunities outside his preferred locations.
Candidate's Interview Performance Was Also Relevant: Company
The opposite parties further argued that selection ultimately depended on the candidate's performance during interviews.
They claimed that Malhotra had participated in recruitment processes involving companies including Cognizant, Capgemini, and Innomick.
The company maintained that it could not compel an independent employer to appoint a candidate and that any failure to secure employment could not automatically amount to deficiency in its service.
Commission Examines Meaning Of '100% Placement Guarantee'
The commission distinguished between ordinary placement assistance and a service specifically marketed as a "100% guaranteed placement".
It observed that a service provider cannot compel an independent employer to select a candidate. However, the issue before the commission was not whether an employer could be forced to appoint Malhotra.
The key question was whether Eduinx had fulfilled the placement commitment it had itself represented while advertising the programme and accepting Rs 84,960 from the consumer.
Interview Opportunities Not Same As Successful Placement
The commission noted that the WhatsApp conversations relied upon by Eduinx did demonstrate that some placement-related activity had taken place.
However, according to the order, recruitment leads, screening calls, and interviews could not automatically be treated as successful placement.
The commission observed that there was a "substantial distinction" between being informed about a vacancy, participating in a recruitment process, and actually being placed in employment.
It further noted that Eduinx had not produced an appointment letter, joining report, accepted offer letter or any other document establishing that Malhotra had actually been placed and subsequently refused the appointment.
No Documentary Proof Of Rejection Due To Poor Interview Performance
The commission also rejected the company's reliance on the allegation that Malhotra had failed to perform satisfactorily in interviews as a complete defence.
It noted that no documentary evidence had been produced showing the precise nature of the alleged poor performance, interview assessment, marks or ratings awarded by prospective employers, or the specific reasons for rejection.
The actual employers who allegedly rejected the complainant were also not examined before the commission.
The commission therefore held that a general assertion regarding poor interview performance could not, by itself, establish that the company had fulfilled its placement obligation.
Preference For Delhi-NCR Did Not Establish That Guarantee Was Fulfilled
The commission also considered the company's argument that Malhotra had restricted placement opportunities by insisting on Gurugram and Delhi-NCR.
It noted that consumers may communicate reasonable preferences regarding the location where they wish to work.
The commission observed that the company had not satisfactorily established that, before enrolment, Malhotra had been clearly informed that the "100% placement guarantee" would be considered fulfilled by providing any employment opportunity anywhere in India.
It also found that the Mumbai and Bengaluru opportunities relied upon by the company were not shown to have culminated in definite employment offers that were expressly rejected by Malhotra.
'100% Placement Guarantee' Held Material To Consumer's Decision
The commission held that the representation of "100% guaranteed placement" was material because Malhotra was an MBA graduate seeking employment and had paid Rs 84,960 for a professional programme carrying that representation.
According to the order, the company's evidence demonstrated recruitment efforts but did not establish fulfilment of the promised result.
The commission held that if the guarantee was subject to conditions such as interview performance, geographical flexibility or other requirements, those conditions needed to be clearly established and disclosed at the time of sale of the service.
Commission Finds Deficiency In Service And Unfair Trade Practice
Invoking the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the commission held that failure to establish fulfilment of the placement commitment amounted to a shortcoming in the manner of performance of the service hired by the complainant.
It also held that the representation of "100% guaranteed placement", followed by failure to establish fulfilment of that representation, amounted to an unfair trade practice in the circumstances of the case.
At the same time, the commission clarified that it was not holding that an independent employer could be compelled to select a candidate. Its finding was confined to the conduct and obligations of the service provider that had made the placement representation.
Rs 6 Lakh Compensation Claim Not Allowed
Malhotra had sought Rs 6 lakh as compensation for mental agony, harassment, financial loss, and loss of career continuity, besides Rs 30,000 towards litigation expenses.
The commission did not allow the Rs 6 lakh claim, observing that the complainant had not produced sufficient documentary evidence establishing the precise quantum of financial loss and a direct causal connection.
Instead, it awarded Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.
Eduinx Directed To Refund Rs 84,960 Within 45 Days
The complaint was partly allowed.
The commission directed the opposite parties to jointly and severally refund Rs 84,960 to Malhotra within 45 days of receiving a copy of the order.
It further ordered that if the amount is not paid within the stipulated period, the refund will carry interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date on which the original Rs 84,960 was deposited until actual realisation.
The company was also directed to pay Rs 10,000 for mental tension and harassment and Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses within the same 45-day period.
