Punjab

Moga

CC/17/19

Daloveprit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Girnaur Golbal - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. O.S.Jaidka

14 Jun 2017

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

 

                                                                                      CC No. 19 of 2017

                                                                                      Instituted on: 14.02.2017

                                                                                      Decided on: 14.06.2017

 

Daloveprit Singh, aged about 23 years son of Jaswant Singh r/o Village Bhekha, P.O. Jaimalwala Tehsil Baghapurana, District Moga.

                                                                                ……… Complainant

 

Versus

1.       Girnaur Global, office SCF-21, Shahid Bhagat Singh Market, opposite Bus Stand, Moga.

 

2.       Ashish Beri (mobile no.98777-35000) c/o Girnaur Global, Office SCF-21, Shahid Bhagat Singh Market, opposite Bus Stand, Moga.

 

                                                                           ……….. Opposite Parties

 

 

Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

Quorum:    Sh. Ajit Aggarwal,  President

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

 

Present:       Sh. O.S. Jaidka, Advocate Cl. for complainant.

                   Sh. Samir Gupta, Advocate Cl. for opposite parties.

 

ORDER :

(Per Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

 

1.                Complainant has filed the instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") against Girnaur Global, office SCF-21, Shahid Bhagat Singh Market, opposite Bus Stand, Moga and others (hereinafter referred to as the opposite parties) directing them to return a sum of Rs.2,05,000/- received by them with malafide intention and by misrepresentation with interest @ 12%. Further opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension, harassment and agony suffered by complainant and to grant any other relief which this Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant wanted to go to Australia for higher study. The complainant approached to opposite parties, through his uncle namely Bal Karan Singh r/o Takhanwadh, District Moga. The opposite parties told him that he could able to get the admission in Curtin University, Australia. The complainant told that he has passed 10+2, ITI Automobiles and also get 4.50 band from IELTS and the opposite parties told that his case is quite fit and qualify for going to Australia and there will be no difficulty in the said case. The complainant was assured by opposite parties that they will make arrangement to send the complainant shortly. The opposite party no.2 has received a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- on 23.01.2016 and executed a receipt. The opposite party no.2 again received a sum of Rs.45,000/- on 4.2.2016 and executed another receipt. The complainant was told that they have to show a bank balance of Rs.5 lac. Accordingly the complainant has to make arrangement by taking loan from bank and other relatives and has to pay interest for a long time. After waiting for a long time, the complainant was told that the said case is not fit for going to Australia. The complainant came to know the fraud being played by opposite parties. The complainant has requested the opposite parties to return the amount received by them, but they have totally refused to pay anything. Due to illegal and unwanted action of the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered mental tension unnecessary harassment and the complainant has to arrangement for huge amount and to pay interest. The future of the complainant has been ruined due to the wrong advice of the opposite parties. Due to the aforesaid illegal and unwarranted acts of opposite parties, the complainant has suffered huge mental tension and agony. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed written reply taking certain preliminary objections that the complaint of the complainant is not maintainable; that complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands, as he has concealed the material facts from this Forum; that the complainant approached their office alongwith his documents and shows his willingness to pursue the B.Com Course in Australia and hence for arrangement of student visa for Australia. Then after scrutinizing documents and detailed discussions, it was mutually agreed that opposite parties advice and assist (by processing file) the complainant in applying for admission and submitting the relevant documents to Curtin University of Australia in abovesaid B.Com course.  For that, consultancy fees was agreed at and fixed for Rs.28,640/-. Other than that Rs.31,300/- was fixed as Embassy fees and documentation charges. It is agreed between the parties that the abovesaid total package fees of Rs.59,940/- (Rs.28,640/- + Rs.31,300/-) was non-refundable in any case whatsoever. Out of that Rs.45,000/- was received by opposite parties from complainant The pending amount of Rs.14,940/- is to be paid by the complainant on the arrival of final visa. As agreed, opposite parties applied for the admission of the complainant to the above said Australian University, which was duly received by the university. Thereafter the said university accepted the admission application of complainant and sent a Letter of Offer dated 14.10.2015 to the student (complainant) on which course fee is also mentioned alongwith this, university also sent proforma of a letter i.e. Acceptance of Offer, which is to be filled by student and which was later on sent by the student to university alongwith the receipt (telegraph transfer of tuition fees). This issuing of Offer Letter to the complainant by university shows that university has accepted the complainant as a student. The opposite parties then handed over the abovesaid offer letter and acceptance of offer (proforma letter) to the complainant. Not only this much, the complainant thereafter deposited the fees directly in the account of university of amount i.e. AUS $ 15,775/- (13800 fees + 1975 insurance). All these above facts show that the opposite parties have very well rendered its services to the complainant. Then after sometime the complainant again visited their office and told him that he was not interested to go to Australia and wanted to withdraw/abandon the abovesaid process and asked them to assist in getting refund of fees paid to Curtin University of Australia. Then the complainant, to withdraw the above process, voluntarily submitted to the opposite parties duly signed Withdrawal of Process-Request Form. The complainant also submitted duly signed application for refund disbursement to Bank of fees directly paid to university. Not only this much, the complainant got the fees refund from the Curtin University with the assistance of opposite parties. So, when the complainant voluntarily withdraws from the processing of case, the question of not getting visa or the question whether his case is qualify to get study visa or not, did not arise at all. It is only after the submission of case of complainant to the relevant Embassy and after considering the reply sent by Embassy, such question arises. The opposite parties were always ready and willing to render its service, it is only the complainant who himself withdraws from availing the services of opposite parties. So, no fault or deficiency lies in the services of opposite parties at all. Moreover, it was also agreed by the complainant that he has exercised his own skill and knowledge and not relied upon the representations of the opposite parties. After the offer letter is received, one day the complainant visited the office of opposite parties and requested to arrange loan of Rs.20 lakh for the complainant to be shown as funds and also told that he is ready to pay interest in advance for the same. On the insisting of the complainant, opposite parties told that they tried to get loan from some person/organisation and told the complainant that they will reply the complainant regarding this only after meeting the said person/organisation. Then complainant gave Rs.1,60,000/- as advance interest @ 2% p.m. to the opposite parties with the condition that if the above said person/organisation given approval for giving loan to complainant, then the said amount of Rs.1,60,000/- was given by the opposite parties to the said person as advance interest on loan of Rs.20 lakh and on the other hand, if the said person declines to give loan, the opposite parties will return this amount of Rs.1,60,000/- to the complainant. The opposite parties after meeting with the said person/organisation who was not interested in giving loan to complainant, informed the complainant regarding this. Then on the next day the complainant visited their office and duly received the said amount of Rs.1,60,000/- from the opposite parties and duly executed the receipt of said amount. As earlier stated, out of the total fees settled of Rs.59,940/-, the opposite parties have received Rs.45,000/- from the complainant. As per agreed terms amount of Rs.29,640/- was non-refundable being the consultancy package fee, in any case whatsoever. As the process was voluntarily withdraw by the complainant having no fault of the opposite parties, even then the opposite parties have returned Rs.15,000/- to the complainant on 19.12.2016, out of the payment of Rs.45,000/- received by opposite parties. Moreover, a full and final release regarding the final payment received by the complainant from the opposite parties and regarding the discharge of this contract of engagement was duly executed by the complainant in favour of opposite parties at the time of receiving of the above amount of Rs.15,000/-. On merits, all other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

4.                In order to prove the case, complainant tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. C-1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence. 

5.                On the other hand, opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh.Ashish Beri, Managing Officer of Girnaur Global as Ex.OPs-1 and copies of documents Ex.OPs-2 to Ex.OPs-12 and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through record placed on file.

7.                The case of the complainant is that he wants to go to Australia for higher study. For it, he approached opposite parties, who are travel agents. The opposite parties said that he can able to get admission in Curtin University, Australia and he is quite fit and qualified for going to Australia and assured that they will make arrangement to send the complainant shortly. Opposite party no.2 received a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- on 23.01.2016 and executed a receipt, copy of the same is Ex.C-3. He again received Rs.45,000/- on 04.02.2016 and executed a receipt, copy of the same is Ex.C-2. They told to complainant that he have to show the bank balance of Rs.5,00,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant had to make arrangement by taking loan from the bank and relatives. After waiting for a long time, opposite parties told that case of the complainant is not fit for going to Australia. Then the complainant came to know the fraud being played by opposite parties. The complainant requested the opposite parties to return the amount received by them, but they refused to pay anything. Due to this act of opposite parties, the complainant has suffered mental tension, harassment and monetary loss.

8.                On the other hand, ld. Counsel for opposite parties argued that complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum. He approached to opposite parties alongwith his documents, as he was willing to go Australia for higher study and they started the process to arrange for student visa for Australia and it was agreed between the parties that opposite parties will advice and assist the complainant for admission and submitting the relevant documents with Curtin University of Australia and for this purpose consultancy fees was agreed for Rs.28,640/- and Rs.31,300/- was fixed as Embassy fees and documentation charges, total Rs.59,940/-, which was non refundable in any case whatsoever. The complainant paid Rs.45,000/- to opposite parties and the remaining amount of Rs.14,940/- was to be paid by the complainant on arrival of final visa. This fact itself clear from the receipt Ex.C-2 produced by complainant himself, as agreed between the parties for the admission of the complainant in Curtin University. The said university accepted the admission application of the complainant and sent a letter of offer to the complainant on which course fee was also mentioned and alongwith it the said university also sent letter of Acceptance of Offer, which was to be filled by student and can be sent to university alongwith course fee. These documents were handed over by opposite party no.2 to complainant and thereafter the complainant deposited the course fee directly in the account of university. As such, the opposite parties very well rendered its services to the complainant. After some time, the complainant again visited the office of opposite parties and told that he is not interested to go to Australia and wanted to withdraw the abovesaid process and asked for the assistance for the refund of fees paid to Curtin University, Australia. In order to withdraw the process, the complainant has voluntarily submitted the duly signed Withdrawal of Process- Request Form. The complainant duly signed the application for refund of fee directly paid by him to university. The complainant got the fees refund from the Curtin University with the assistance of opposite parties. Copy of the letter of offer and acceptance of offer sent by Curtain University, Australia is Ex.OP-3 and OP-4 respectively, the request form for withdrawal of process, withdrawal of visa application, refund of course fee are Ex.OP-6 to Ex.OP-8 respectively, which were duly signed by the complainant. The complainant also executed an affidavit dated 10.04.2017 in favour of opposite parties to the effect that he himself withdraw his visa application process on his own and discharged the opposite parties. So, complainant voluntarily withdraws his visa case. Now, the question for non getting the visa does not arise at all. The job of the opposite parties was only to assist the complainant for submission of his case to the relevant embassy and university, which was done by opposite parties effectively. The opposite parties were always ready and willing to render its service and it is only the complainant who himself withdraw his case after availing the services of opposite parties. So, there is no deficiency in service and fault on the part of opposite parties.

9.                It has been further argued by opposite parties that after receiving the offer letter, the complainant had to show funds in his account and for this purpose he requested the opposite parties to assist and also requested to arrange loan of Rs.20 lakh. He also told that he is ready to pay the interest in advance. On it, opposite parties told that they tried to get the loan from some person and they will reply him, only after meeting to said person. The complainant paid Rs.1,60,000/- as advance interest with opposite parties with the condition that if the above person gave approval for the loan, then the said amount of Rs.1,60,000/- was to be given by opposite parties to the said person as advance interest on loan, otherwise if he decline for the loan and then they will return the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- to complainant. The said person was not agreed to give loan to complainant and the opposite parties informed the complainant regarding it. On it, the complainant visited the office of opposite parties and received the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- from them and duly executed receipt regarding the same. Copy of the receipt regarding Rs.1,60,000/- duly signed by complainant and same is dated 28.01.2016, copy of the same is Ex.OP-10. Moreover, the fact that opposite parties received an amount of Rs. 1,60,000/-  as advance interest on behalf of some person is also clear from the receipt Ex.C-3 itself, where, it is clearly mention that opposite parties received this amount on behalf of Raman Bansal. Out of the total fee settled as consultancy and Embassy  fee etc. total Rs.59,940/- and the opposite parties had received Rs.45,000/- only from the complainant, which is not refundable, as the process voluntarily withdrawn by the complainant having no fault on the part of opposite parties. So, the complainant cannot claim refund of this amount. However, even then, the opposite parties refunded Rs.15,000/- out of Rs.45,000/- on 19.12.2016 vide demand draft, which was duly received by the complainant and he issued receipt regarding it, which bears signatures of the complainant and the same is Ex.OP-11. On the same day the complainant also issued Full and Final Release letter in favour of opposite parties and the same is Ex.OP-12. Now, nothing is due towards the opposite parties. The complainant filed the present case only to harass the opposite parties and to get unlawful financial benefits from opposite parties by blackmailing them.

10.              We have thoroughly gone through the file, evidence and arguments lead by ld. counsel for the parties. The opposite parties produced receipt regarding the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- and Rs.15,000/- and also full and final release letter and other documents which are duly signed by the complainant himself vide which the complainant received back the amount as alleged by the complainant from opposite parties and himself withdrew his case for study visa. All these documents bear the signatures of complainant. The complainant never challenged these documents or his signatures bears on these documents, meaning thereby that the complainant admitted the genuineness of all these documents.

11.              From the above discussion, we found no merits in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties, free of costs. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated: 14.06.2017

 

                                                 (Bhupinder Kaur)                    (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                                              Member                                    President