DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)
Complaint No. 155 of 2016
Dated of institute 11.03.2016
Decided On 20.12.2017
1.Gurchararn Singh S/o Sh. Jagir Singh.
2.Ranchander Singh S/o Sh.Gurcharan Singh,
Both residents of Village and Post Office Gharuan, Tehsil Kharar District Mohali (Punjab).
Complainants………
Vs
Bharti Education & Immigration Consultancy Services Pvt Ltd, through its Managing Director, SCF No.19-20, 2nd floor, Phase-10, Mohali.
Opposite Party…..
Complaint under Section 12 of
the Consumer Protection Act.
Quorum: Sh. G.K. Dhir, President,
Ms. Natasha Chopra, Member
Present:- Complainant No.1 in person with counsel Sh.Manmohan Singh
OP ex-parte.
Order by :- Sh. G.K. Dhir, President.
Order
Complainants, the father and son contacted the OP for engaging it for consultancy for Canada PR Visa on 07.11.2013. Agreement in that respect was signed by complainant No.1 on behalf of complainant No.2 and his family by paying Rs. 40,000/- to the OP as per the schedule for providing consultancy services, for applying visa selection by the complainants and assisting the complainants in compilation of documents etc. Even services for interview preparation and of processing by visa office or assessment of qualification etc were to be got provided by the OP. However, the OP has not moved the case of complainant No.2 and his family, despite receipt of amount of Rs.1,16,000/- as certified through certificate of 19.12.2013. No information was provided to the complainants regarding the case . LMO fee collected from the complainants by the OP of Rs. 1,16,000/- on 21.10.2014 has neither been returned nor any action for those services initiated by the OP. It is also claimed that an amount of Rs. 1 lac more was paid in cash to the OP, but the OP did not issue any receipt despite requests. So by pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OP and by claiming that the OP has cheated the complainants, this complaint has been filed for seeking refund of the paid amount of Rs. 3,72,000/- with interest @ 18% P.A along with compensation for harassment and mental agony of Rs. 3 lacs as well as litigation expenses of Rs.33,000/-.
2. The OP is ex-parte in this case.
3. Written arguments not filed by the complainant. Oral arguments heard and records gone through.
4. The complainant No.1 along with his counsel tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant Sh. Gurcharan Singh Ex CW1/1 along with documents Ex C-1 to Ex C-3 and thereafter closed the ex-parte evidence.
5. Ex C-1 is the contract of engagement of the OP for Canada PR visa. Payment of Rs. 40,000/- by the complainant No.1 to the OP evidenced by Ex C-1 itself. Through Ex C-1, the OP was to provide consultancy services for applying visa and even support the complainants for onward submission of the documents for processing by visa office; assist the complainants in assessing the qualification required by the embassy and to provide other consultancy services. However, despite this agreement, the OP has not given any intimation to the complainants regarding submission of the documents. Rather the complainants through their affidavit Ex CW1/1 claims that the undertaken services were never provided by the OP to them and that certainly amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
6. Even two more amounts of Rs. 1,16,000/- each were paid by the complainants to the OP through receipts Ex C-2 and Ex C-3 on 19.12.2013 and 21.10.2014, but despite that LMO fee not forwarded for the purposes of PR Visa to the Canadian Immigration Authority, is the case of the complainant. Intimation regarding the action taken by the OP in matter of rendering consultancy or other services was not provided by the OP to the complainants and as such certainly the OP dishonestly retained the received amounts, but without fulfilling its part of the contract. That certainly is unfair trade practice because of cheating the gullible of assuring something sans its performance. So certainly the complainants are entitled to the refund of the paid amount with interest. That refund of Rs.2,72,000/- as such is allowable with interest @ 9 % P.A w.e.f the date of last payment i.e. 21.10.2014 till the payment because the transactions in question have been carried out for rendering the consultancy services.
7. The complainants in the complaint as well as in para No.6 of their affidavit Ex CW1/1 claims that another amount of Rs. 1 lacs more was paid to the OP, but the date, month and year of this payment has not been disclosed either in the complaint or in the affidavit .Even the names of the persons to whom the amount has been paid has not been disclosed and as such the allegation in this respect remains vague and general. Neither the name of the MD of the OP was disclosed in the complaint nor in the affidavit or in any other submitted documents and nor the name of the authorized person of the OP, who received the alleged amount of Rs. 1 lacs has been disclosed and as such in view of the vague and general allegation, it has to be held that payment of Rs. 1 lac in cash by the complainants to the OP is not proved, more so when receipt of this payment has not been obtained despite the earlier practice followed by the complainant of obtaining such receipts like Ex C-2 and Ex C-3. So refund of this amount of Rs. 1 lacs cannot be ordered because this amount is a disputed amount regarding which adjudication in the summary proceedings before this Forum is not permissible. The complainants are entitled to compensation for mental agony and harassment to a reasonable extent.
8. As a sequel of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed by directing the OP to pay Rs. 2,72,000/- with interest @ 9% P.A w.e.f 21.10.2014 till payment. Compensation for harassment and metal agony of Rs. 15,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- more allowed in favour of the complainant and against the OP. Payment of these amounts will be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Certified copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
