Punjab

Faridkot

CC/22/58

Jaspal Bajaj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Freebird Abroad Consultants - Opp.Party(s)

Amandeep Singh Parmar

13 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FARIDKOT

 

             CC No. :                      58 of 2022

Date of Institution:        26.04.2022

Date of Decision :         13.12.2022

Jaspal Bajaj aged about 36 years son of Chand Lal, resident of Village Kauni, Tehsil and District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

Freebird Abroad Consultants, office at Piccadilly Square Mall, Office No.4, First Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through HOD Jaspal Singh Mann or its authorized signatory.

                                            ....Opposite Party

Complaint under Section 35 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Quorum:     Sh Vishav Kant Garg, Member,

Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present:      Sh. Amandeep Singh Parmar, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                  Opposite Party Ex-parte,

ORDER

(Sh Vishav Kant Garg, Member)

                                        Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against Opposite party seeking directions to them to refund the amount of Rs.49,900/- alongwith interest and for further directing them to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides litigation expenses of Rs.30,000/-.

cc no. - 58 of 2022

2                                               Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant wanted to go to Canada on tourist visa and for this purpose, he contacted opposite party, who assured to provide him tourist visa within few days as OP has good reputation with other countries. On assurance of OP, complainant agreed and deal for Rs.70,000/-was fixed between complainant and OP and as per deal, complainant was to pay Rs.35,000/-in advance and he was to pay remaining Rs.35,000/-at the time of confirmation of visa and other expenses like file charges would be borne by complainant. It is submitted that on 25.06.2020, complainant paid Rs.5000/- against proper receipt and Rs.34,000/-for which OP made endorsement at the back of receipt. Complainant also showed Sponsorship letter to OP. After that complainant approached Opposite party number of times and made several requests to arrange tourist visa for him, rather they lingered on the matter and kept putting him off on one pretext or the other and started making lame excuses. It is alleged that in April, 2021, OP asked complainant to get biometric for which he paid 185 Canadian Dollars (Indian Rupee 10,914/-), but even after biometric, OP failed to arrange tourist visa for him. Despite several requests, OP has failed to arrange tourist visa for complainant and has also not refunded the amount of Rs.49,000/-to complainant. Complainant also served notice to OP through his counsel whereby requested them to refund his entire amount, but all in vain. It amounts

cc no. - 58 of 2022

to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OP. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the instant complaint.

3                           The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 28.04.2022, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

 4                          Registered cover containing copy of complaint alongwith relevant documents was sent to OP, but as per office report, it did not receive back undelivered. Acknowledgement might have been lost in transit. Statutory period expired. Despite several calls till 4.00 O’ clock, OP did not appear in this Commission on date fixed either in person or through calls and therefore, vide order dated 16.06.2022, opposite party was proceeded against exparte.

5                            As Opposite party is exparte, therefore, Ld Counsel for complainant tendered in exparte evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1, documents Ex C-2 to C-10 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                 We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and have carefully gone through the pleadings, supporting affidavit and

 

 

cc no. - 58 of 2022

documents placed on record by complainant party. Opposite Party is exparte and therefore, there is no rebuttal from their side to contradict the allegations of complainant.

7                                    To prove his pleadings, ld counsel for complainant brought our attention towards document Ex C-2 which is copy of Payment Receipt bearing no.25 dated 25.06.2020 that clears the fact that complainant paid Rs.5000/-to OP and Ex C-3, which is on the backside of this page i.e Ex C-2, there are remarks showing the fact that Opposite party has again received Rs.34,000/-from complainant through Paytm swipe card on 25.06.2020. Ex C-7 is official receipt for 185 dollars, issued by Canadian Government in lieu of fees received from complainant. It shows the amount of 185 dollars paid by complainant to OP which comes to Rs.10,914/-in Indian rupee. Meaning thereby, amount of Rs.5,000/-and Rs.34,000/-stands paid by complainant to opposite party on 25.06.2020 + 185 dollars and opposite party has also issued receipt regarding receiving of this amount. Ex C-5 is copy of Statutory Declaration given by uncle and aunt of complainant showing the fact that they sponsored visit of complainant in Canada for the purpose of tour for fifteen days, further proves the pleadings of complainant. Legal notice Ex C-8 further justifies the pleadings of complainant and proves the fact that complainant has

 

cc no. - 58 of 2022

suffered huge harassment and mental agony in the hands of Opposite party. Through his affidavit ExC-1 complainant has reiterated his grievance.

7                                     We are fully convinced with the evidence, arguments and documents placed on record by the Counsel for the complainant. There is nothing on record from OP side to contradict the documents placed on record by the complainant. There is no doubt that complainant hired the services of OP for obtaining visa for going to Canada. OP failed to send complainant to Canada and  also did not refund the amount of Rs.49,900/-received from him. When the OP failed to send complainant to Canada, then, they have not right to retain the amount paid by complainant to them and opposite party is liable to return the same to him. It is proved that Rs.49,900/-were duly paid by complainant to the OP on date 25.06.2020. There is no doubt regarding payment of this amount to opposite party, but the act of OP in not refunding the amount received from complainant, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on his part. The complainant has succeeded in proving this case, therefore, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. Opposite Party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.49,900/- to complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per anum from the date of filing the present complaint till final realization. Opposite party is hereby further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by complainant alongwith Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses.

cc no. - 58 of 2022

Compliance of this order be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of the order failing which complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings as per Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to the record room. 

Announced in Commission

Dated: 13.12.2022

(Vishav Kant Garg)            (Param Pal Kaur)                

                                                 Member                            Member