Date of filing : 20-03-2012
Date of order : 29-10-2012
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.72/2012
Dated this, the 29th day of October 2012
PRESENT
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ : PRESIDENT
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : MEMBER
SMT. K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
Abbas Noushad, S/o. Moosa, } Complainant
Chevar House, Kudal Merkala.Po,
Via. Mangalpady.
(In Person)
1. Jalak Infotech, Kannukulangara, } Opposite parties
Eramaloor.Po. Alapuza. 688537
(Adv.M.M.Anto, Payyanur)
2. M/s Zilicon BPO Pvt. Ltd,
CC.No.40/6457, Varappan Building,
Banarjee Road, Ernakulam.682018.
O R D E R
SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ, PRESIDENT
The case of the complainant is recapitulated hereunder with relative brevity.
Complainant came to know in the website of 2nd opposite party about the service job of data entry. On contacting them they directed the complainant to contact their franchisee the 1st opposite party herein. Knowing about ‘Adclick’ job he paid `10500/- to 2nd opposite party through their franchisee the 1st opposite party. They assured him that the service job will be made available within a week and that job can be done from the home of the complainant itself. But as assured he did not get the job. So he enquired about it with 1st opposite party. Then it was told that said job is not available at present but another better service job is available and that is luxury hotel Form Filling. It was also told that `31000/- is required for the job and the expected salary would be between `30,000/- and `60,000/-so the complainant remitted the balance amount `20,500/- by way of D/D to first opposite party. On payment of the said amount opposite party told that the receipt for payment will be sent to his home and the service job will be available within a month. But the date of the job is extended by the opposite party several times. Finally when the complainant demanded the money back opposite parties asked several dates for refund. But till date it is not repaid. Hence the complaint claiming the refund of `31000/- with compensation of `20, 000/-.
2. According to 1st opposite party complainant was a customer of Zilicon BPO the 2nd opposite party herein. They canvassed job opportunities through their website. It was they guided the complainant to approach first opposite party who is a franchisee of Zilicon BPO and opposite party No.1 was acting as guided by the Principal. The payment of `10500/-is the amount fixed by Zilicon BPO for registration. Subsequently Zilicon BPO conveyed the information that due to ‘server problem adclick work is not possible when first opposite party requested Zilicion BPO to refund the registration fee, they informed opposite party No.1 that the registered parties can opt another better work i.e. holiday in resort work provided they make further payment of `20,500/-. But the ‘server complaint’ again persisted. Later Zilicon BPO Ltd themselves collected the details of customer to deal with them directly. Thereafter it was Zilicon BPO who is dealing with the customer directly. Out of `31000/- paid by complainant `1000/- alone retained by 1st opposite party and the balance is paid to 2nd opposite party. The first opposite party is therefore not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant nor liable to refund the amount.
3. After filing the version, at the instance of 1st opposite party M/s Zilicon BPO Pvt Ltd was impleaded as supplemental opposite partyNo.2. But the notice issued to 2nd opposite party is returned unserved with endorsement ’left’. Subsequently 1st opposite party also remained absent from the Forum. Therefore the complainant is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 is marked. Complainant adduced evidence in tune with his complaint. Ext.A1 is the photocopy of the receipt issued from SBI Kumbala Branch. It shows that complainant has remitted `20,500/- to opposite parties. In evidence complainant deposed that he paid `10,500/- directly to the 1st opposite party.
4. From the evidence adduced it is evident that opposite party No.1 received `31,000/- from the complainant. But no service is given to him as offered. Hence opposite party No.1 is liable under Consumer Protection Act.
5. The complaint is therefore allowed and opposite party No.1 is directed to refund `31,000/- to the complainant with a cost of `3,000/-. Time for compliance of the order is limited to 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Failing which they shall further liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum for `31,000/- from today till payment. Had the 1st opposite party got a contention that it is the 2nd opposite party who is liable to refund the amount, then 1st opposite party can take appropriate legal proceedings against 2nd opposite party to recover the amount paid by them to the complainant after satisfying the claim of the complainant.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1. Photocopy of receipt issued by S.B.I. Kumbala branch.
PW1. Abbas Nowshad.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
