By Smt. Beena. M,  Member

Brief facts of the case:- The complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer protection act.   The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 for getting job for his son, Job and who introduced  opposite party No.2 to the complainant as he is the man who providing job in overseas.  The 2^nd opposite party  assured that he will avail a job visa for electrical assistant to the son of the complainant and they demanded Rs.85,000/- (Eighty five thousand) as visa processing expenses. Thereafter in the month of September 2015 the complainant paid Rs.85,000/- (Eighty five thousand) to the opposite party No.2 as demanded and the second opposite party issued a receipt for the same.   At that time opposite party No.2 promised that they will avail the visa within one month.  But even after several months later they did not issued visa to the complainant and after that the complainant asked about the visa the 1^st opposite party return back Rs.5,000/-(five Thousand) and said that he received only Rs.5,000/- as his commission. Thereafter the complainant contacted the 2^nd opposite party several time through phone and directly and asked him to return back the money. The 2^nd opposite party not return back the money and then he send a lawyer notice threatening the complainant.  The opposite parties failed to arrange Visa and they are not ready to return back the money.    The act of the opposite parties amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service and they are liable to pay compensation for the loss and sufferings occurred to the complainant. Hence this complaint.

           2. Notices were served to the opposite parties and opposite party No.1 appeared through his power of attorney holder and filed version and the opposite party  No.2 not appeared and declared ex parte.  

            3. The 1^st opposite party stated that the complainant approached the first opposite party through one of his friend for a job in overseas and then he introduced the 2^nd opposite party to the complainant through phone. At that time the 1^st opposite party said to the complainant that all further transactions and communications with the 2^nd opposite party should be conducted directly. Thereafter as per the instruction of opposite party No.2 the opposite party No.1 received Rs.15,000/-  from  Job, son of the complainant and said that the amount to be given to the 2^nd opposite party. After receiving that amount the 1^st opposite party send that amount to the 2^nd opposite party.  He further averred that he never expected any commission or any monitory benefits from the complainant and he only thought that a family may escape from the financial crisis.   All further transactions were done by the complainant and his son directly with the 2^nd opposite party.  The opposite party No.1 stated that he only introduced opposite party No.2 to the complainant . It is learned that the 2^nd opposite party issued a job visa to the complainant’s son and a copy of the visa sent to the 1^st opposite party. After several months, the complainant and his son approached the 1^st opposite party and said that he not going to abroad for job and demanded to return back Rs.15,000/-. Thereafter the 1^st opposite party return back Rs.15,000/- through the bank account of Beena Kunjappan, daughter of the complainant.  Then the 1^st opposite party contacted the 2^nd opposite party through  phone and learned       from him that he arranged and issued a job visa to   the   complainant‘s son  as  he promised, but  the son of the complainant was not ready to go abroad. So the visa was automatically cancelled.  The 1^st opposite party had never done any harm to the complainant as he alleged and  he is not liable to pay compensation or any amount to the complainant.  

4. The second opposite party failed to appear before this Forum.    

5. On perusal of complaint, version and documents the Forum raised the following points for consideration:-

    1. Whether there is any deficiency of service and unfair trade practice  

         from the part of opposite parties side?

   2.  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any amount?

    3. Relief and cost.

6. Point No. 1 to 3 :-  For the sake of convenience and brevity all points are considered together.

7. For substantiate the case of the case, the complainant produced documents along with the complaint.  Complainant filed proof affidavit and stated as stated in the complaint and he is examined as PW-1 and Ext.A-1, A2 documents   were marked.         The Power of attorney holder of the 1^st opposite party examined as OPW-1 Ext. B1 and B2 were marked. 

8. On going through the available records and submissions there is no dispute that the complainant and the opposite parties are communicated each other for visa purposes and the complainant had spend money for it.  So there is no more discussion needed regarding that point. The 1^st opposite party produced the visa and marked that as subject to proof. Ongoing through the Ext.A-2 lawyer notice dated 30-05-2016 it is very clearly stated that a visa was issued to the complainant’s son on 27-05-2015. But the complainant suppressed that matter in the complaint. In the complaint the complainant throughout stated that the opposite parties were not arranged any job as they promised but he  is not stated that a visa was issued.  There is no case that the visa issued by the opposite party is

not genuine or not sufficient for the complainant.  The complainant admitted that the 2^nd opposite party issued a lawyer notice dated 30-05-2015 but he failed to plead and prove that the visa is a fake one.  The complainant is failed to establish a genuine case against the opposite parties regarding deficiency of service. Here the respondents were not guilty of deficiency in service  as alleged by the complainant. Considering the whole facts and circumstances of this case the Forum decline to allow any of the reliefs sought for.  The points are found against the complainant.

In the result, the complaint is dismissed without cost.

            Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 13^th       day of February 2020.

Date of filing:11.08.2017.

                                                                                    PRESIDENT:  Sd/-

                                                                                    MEMBER   :  Sd/-

                                                                                    MEMBER  :   Sd/-

APPENDIX.

Witness for the Complainant.:-

PW1.              Kunjappan.                          Complainant.                                  

Witness for the Opposite Parties:-

OPW1.          Eldo.  P. G.                            Cook.            

Exhibits for the Complainant:    

A1.      Receipt.                                 dt:23.09.2015.

A2.      Copy of Notice.                   dt:30.05.2016.

Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-

B1.      Receipt.                                 dt:16.02.2016.

B2.      e Visa.