MBA graduate pays Rs 84,960 for '100% placement guarantee' course but gets no job: Court orders over Rs 1 lakh payout

An MBA graduate who paid Rs 84,960 for an online programme after being promised a “100 percent guaranteed placement” has won a refund after a Punjab district consumer commission found that the placement commitment had not been fulfilled.

The Gurdaspur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directed Eduinx Education Services Pvt Ltd to refund the entire course fee to complainant Harish Malhotra. It also ordered the company to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental tension and harassment and Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.

The order was passed on September 16, 2026.


Read more - 75-day traffic & power block: From October 1, 8 Mumbai-bound trains to be short-terminated as CSMT redevelopment resumes

MBA graduate paid Rs 84,960 for AI course with placement promise

According to the commission's order, Malhotra enrolled in a six-month online training programme in AI in product management after coming across an advertisement by Eduinx that promised “100 percent guaranteed placement”.

He paid Rs 84,960 by credit card on July 12, 2025. After completing the programme, he received his course certificate on November 24, 2025.

Read more - Indian Coast Guard catches Pakistanis in Iranian dhow with 526 kg drugs: How maritime border agency busted a Rs 3,000 crore narcotics haul in Arabian Sea

Malhotra alleged that the promised placement did not materialise despite repeated follow-ups with the company. He said he was given revised timelines instead.

He subsequently approached the consumer commission seeking a refund of the course fee. He also sought compensation for what he described as mental agony, harassment, financial loss and disruption to his career.

What did Eduinx say about the placement guarantee?

Eduinx denied the allegations and argued that it was an upskilling and career-support platform rather than an employer or appointing authority.

The company maintained that the “100 percent placement guarantee” related to services such as career preparation, profile optimisation and outreach to potential employers. According to its argument, the final decision to hire rested with individual employers.

Eduinx also told the commission that Malhotra had participated in recruitment processes involving companies including Cognizant, Capgemini and Innomick.

The company claimed that he had declined certain job opportunities in Mumbai, Bengaluru and Hyderabad because he preferred locations in Gurugram or Delhi-NCR.

Why did the consumer commission order a refund?

The commission, comprising President Lalit Mohan Dogra and member B S Matharu, noted that Eduinx had accepted Rs 84,960 after making the placement representation.

While the company produced evidence of recruitment-related efforts, the bench said this did not establish that the specific placement commitment made to the consumer had been fulfilled.

The commission drew a distinction between helping a candidate secure interviews and actually providing the placement represented while selling the programme.

“The opposite parties cannot simultaneously rely upon the expression ‘100 percent placement guarantee’ to induce a consumer to purchase the programme and, after the consumer has paid the consideration, interpret the same merely as a promise to forward his profile to employers and arrange interviews,” the commission observed.

It added that if the service was limited to interview opportunities and recruitment assistance, that limitation should have been clearly disclosed when the consumer enrolled.

Interviews did not amount to guaranteed employment, says commission

The commission also considered WhatsApp conversations between the parties. It found that these showed some job opportunities had been communicated to Malhotra, but did not establish that he had received a definite employment offer.

“A mere suggestion of a vacancy cannot be equated with an employment offer as promised,” the bench said.

It further noted that a recruitment lead, screening call or interview could not be treated as equivalent to successful placement.

The commission also rejected the company's argument that Malhotra's interview performance was responsible for the absence of a job offer. It noted that Eduinx had not produced interview assessments, ratings or employer communications showing that he had been rejected because of his performance.

Commission calls ‘100 percent placement guarantee’ an unfair trade practice

The consumer commission held that the failure to fulfil the placement commitment amounted to deficiency in service.

It also held that representing the programme as offering “100 percent guaranteed placement”, without clearly stating conditions that could substantially qualify the promise, amounted to an unfair trade practice.

“If the opposite parties wished to make the guarantee conditional upon the complainant's performance in interviews, they were required to establish the existence and applicability of such conditions,” the commission said.

The bench added that a general explanation offered after the dispute could not replace a clear contractual condition disclosed when the service was sold.

Why was Rs 6 lakh compensation claim rejected?

Malhotra had sought Rs 6 lakh for financial loss and loss of career continuity, besides Rs 30,000 towards litigation expenses.

However, the commission did not grant the larger compensation claim. It said there was not enough documentary evidence to establish the exact financial loss or a direct connection between the claimed loss and the company's service.

Instead, it awarded Rs 10,000 for mental tension and harassment and Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.

Eduinx ordered to refund Rs 84,960 within 45 days

The Gurdaspur consumer commission directed Eduinx Education Services Pvt Ltd to:

• Refund Rs 84,960 paid by Malhotra for the programme.
• Pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental tension and harassment.
• Pay Rs 5,000 towards litigation expenses.
• Make the payments within 45 days of receiving a copy of the order.
• Pay 9% annual interest on the Rs 84,960 refund, calculated from the date of deposit until actual realisation, if the order is not complied with within the 45-day period.

The order places the focus on the distinction between a course provider offering recruitment assistance and making an express representation that a consumer is guaranteed placement.


Inputs from TOI