BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT.

Complaint No. : 187

Date of Institution : 21.6.2010

Date of Decision : 8.11.2010

Harbirpal Singh Dhillon son of S. Jaswant Singh, resident of V. Golewala Tehsil and District Faridkot.

...Complainant Versus

Atlantic Shipping Corporation Canada, SCO 208-209, 4^th Storey, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, India, now SCO No. 323, Sector 40-D, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director.

...Opposite Party

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum: Sh. Ashok Kumar President

Dr. H.L. Mittal Member

Present: Sh. Lakhbinder Singh counsel for the complainant.

Opposite party exparte.

ORDER

Complainant has filed the present complaint against the opposite party for not making refund of fee charged for placement of the complainant worth Rs. 2,40,000/- out of total fee of Rs. 3,00,000/- and for directing the opposite party to refund the remaining amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of its deposit i.e. 11.7.2007 till its refund and also to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of harassment and mental tension besides litigation expenses of Rs. 20,000/-.

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the opposite party got an advertisement published for employment in company managed vessels. The opposite party at first was to give training and then to give placement of the complainant for the job and for this purpose they required a total fee of Rs. 4,55,000/-. The complainant applied with the opposite party for the job and sent all the required documents alongwith a demand draft dated 11.7.2007 for Rs. 4,55,000/- and in response he was selected for the job and after receiving letter from the opposite party the complainant joined the institute for the training purposes and completed his training with the opposite party at Chandigarh. But after completing the training successfully the opposite party miserably failed to make placement of the complainant for the job and kept the matter linger on with one pretext or the other and at last refused to make placement of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant requested the opposite party to refund his fee charged for placement worth Rs. 3 lacs out of total amount of Rs. 4,55,000/- as an amount of Rs. 1,55,000/- was for the training purpose but the opposite party refunded only Rs. 60,000/- to the complainant in the month of February/March, 2010 and thus an amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- has still remained due towards the opposite party. Since February/March, 2010 the complainant is requesting the opposite party to make refund of the remaining amount but they flatly refused to refund any money to the complainant, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Complainant is also entitled for compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- with litigation expenses of Rs. 20,000/-. Hence this complaint.

3. The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 24.6.2010 complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4. The notice was sent to the opposite party through RC on 9.9.2010 which was received back with the report Unclaimed which shows that the opposite party was aware of the complaint but it intentionally avoided the service, so the opposite party was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 21.10.2010.

5. The complainant wanted to lead evidence to prove his pleadings and proper opportunity was given to him for the purpose. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of passport Ex.C-2, copy of receipt No. 52 dated 12.7.2007 Ex.C-3, copy of draft No. 934909 Ex.C-4, copy of advertisement Ex.C-5 and closed his evidence.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have ourselves gone into the record carefully. As per learned counsel for the complainant latter was allured by the opposite party by the offer of his placement for the job and made him to pay total fee of Rs. 4,55,000/-. Document Ex.C-5 witnesses training and sponsorship of qualified candidates and complainant was also selected but no placement given to him as per offer in this respect, vide news item in Newspaper Rozana Spokesman of 23^rd June, 2007 Ex.C-6.

7. From the exparte evidence led by the complainant which has remained un-rebutted and un-assailed due to non appearance of opposite party inspite of their service it can be clearly made out that by advertisement in the aforesaid newspaper opposite party charged Rs. 4,55,000/- from the complainant vide receipt dated 12.7.2007 Ex.C-3 by way of demand draft Ex.C-4 but left him high and dry only after training. In para 4 of the complaint and the affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1 he has stated that out of Rs. 4,55,000/-, Rs. 3,00,000/- were received by opposite party for his placement and it only refunded Rs. 60,000/- out of the placement charges in the month of February/March, 2010 leaving Rs. 2,40,000/- payable to the complainant. As already pointed out above nobody turned up from the opposite side to contest the claim of the complainant under the present complaint. Therefore, in view of the exparte evidence led by the complainant we have found him entitled to Rs. 2,40,000/- besides Rs. 10,000/- on account of compensation for harassment, mental agony and litigation expenses. Consequently, the complaint filed by the complainant Harbirpal Singh Dhillon is accepted exparte and opposite party is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the complainant, within the period of one month from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the opposite party shall pay the above mentioned amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the decision of this complaint till realization of the amount. In case no compliance is made out of this order, complainant shall be entitled to proceed under the provisions of Sections 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.

Announced in open Forum:

Dated: 8.11.2010

Member President (Dr. H.L. Mittal) (Ashok Kumar)