DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SAS NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.817 of 2019

                                                Date of institution:  23.05.2019                                              Date of decision   :  15.10.2020

Bahadur Singh Bhangu aged about 63 years son of Shri Surjit Singh resident of House No.2, Street No.11, Mohalla Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Dhandra Road, P.O. Gill, Ludhiana-141116, Punjab.  

…….Complainant

Versus

Jap Study Abroad & Consultants, OPC Pvt. Limited, SCF-45, Top Floor, Phase-7, Mohali, Punjab through its Proprietor.

                                                      ……..Opposite Party  

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act.

Quorum:   Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

                Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member

Present:    None for the complainant.

                OP Ex-parte.

Order dictated by :-  Shri Sanjiv Dutt Sharma, President.

Order

               The present order of ours will dispose of a complaint under Consumer Protection Act, filed by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred as ‘OP’ for short), on the ground that his son Onkar Singh had intended to go to Australia for higher studies in the subject of Commercial Cookery. The son of the CC passed his 10+2 examination in first division. Thereafter the son of the CC studied in Malaysia for one year. With the Malaysian studies, the son of CC also started preparing for PTE/IELTS. It is alleged that the son of the CC had paid heavy coaching/tuition fee in Malaysia and in India to pass his PTE/IELTS. The son of the CC attempted four times to get the score of 5.5 bands. Thereafter the son of the CC started exploring good study visa agent in order to go to Australia. It is averred, that on 18.01.2018 the CC found one advertisement in the newspaper ‘Ajit’. As such the CC chose to avail the services of the OP in order to obtain study visa for his son. It is averred that the CC attended office of the OP on 29.01.2018. Accordingly the CC also handed over original certificates and passport of Onkar Singh, allegedly the son of the CC. It is alleged that Rs.30,000/- were handed over to Ms. Minakshi Sharma, employee of the OP. It is alleged that she refused to give any proper receipt in order to save GST. It is averred that after 5-1/2 months, the OP arranged offer letter for the son of the CC, in the course known as “Diploma in Hospitality Management”. That offer letter was issued by Australian International College of Australia. After getting the offer letter, the CC requested the OP to allow the CC to deposit the tuition fee of that college but every time the OP informed the CC that this particular college is not a good college and in case of rejection or refusal the college do not refund the paid tuition fee. The OP also assured the CC that it will arrange a new offer letter from some other good college. In the meantime the validity of the PTE/IELTS certificate of son of the CC also got expired. During this entire activity the OP also asked the CC to show funds in order to get visa. Accordingly the CC showed Rs.46.00 lakhs in two different saving accounts to the OP.  After hearing this, it is alleged that the OP changed its mind and decided not to submit the study visa matter of the son of the CC with Australian Embassy. It is also alleged that the OP intended to earn interest on the amount of the CC of Rs.2,10,000/- on funds of Rs.30.00 lakhs. That is how the CC was cheated. It is further averred that the offer letter shows that the session of study in the course was to start from 08.10.2018. However, till this date the OP did not allow the CC to deposit the tuition fee of that college and had not arranged the new offer letter from any other college in Australia. On 08.10.2018 the CC visited the office of OP and demanded back his son’s original certificates and passport and also refund of Rs.30,000/- which was deposited by the CC.  On this, the OP demanded an affidavit attested by Notary with specific mentioning of the CC that he has received all the documents/amount of his son and nothing is due against the OP and also that the CC will not claim anything in future from the OP. The OP also asked the CC to get the affidavit attested from Mr. Manvender Singh, Notary who was the “bounded” person of the OP to do  its work. The OP also made it clear that the OP will not entertain without Mr. Manvender Singh’s prepared and attested affidavit.  It is alleged that the OP refused to refund Rs.30,000/- to the CC even after filing of written affidavit alleging that the same is non refundable. The CC also served legal notice dated 06.03.2019 but in vain.

                Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the CC has sought the following relief:

        (a)    Advance consultation fee Rs.30,000/-

        (b)    Coaching/tuition fee of PTE/IELTS paid for two years @ Rs.9,000/- per month = Rs.2,16,000/-.

        ( c)   Examination/test fee of PTE/IELTS @ Rs.11,000/- paid 4 times = Rs.44,000/-

        (d)    Compensation on account of harassment and mental  agony for more than on year suffered by the CC and his son =Rs.1,50,000/-

                Complaint of the CC is duly signed and verified. Further the same is also supported by an affidavit of the CC.

2.             The OP has chosen to remain ex-parte and was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 04.09.2019 of this Commission.

3.             Since the entire evidence of the CC is on the file and the OP is already ex-parte, we feel that no prejudice is going to be caused to any of the parties if the present complaint is decided on merits. Otherwise also the present Consumer Protection Act, is a Special Act which is enacted to provide speedy justice to the parties.

4.             We have perused the entire complaint and the documents attached with the complaint minutely.

5.             We feel, that the contents of the complaint are highly contradictory and are not in consonance with the documents attached with the complaint. There is nothing in the complaint that the son of the CC was either minor or in some manner he had authorised his father to file the complaint on his behalf. There is no power of attorney or even any authority given to the father by the son who had grievance against the OP. There is nothing in the complaint that the father is legally authorised to file the complaint on behalf of his son, who had no prejudice against his son or there is no declaration in the complaint that the same is filed on behalf of his son. We feel, that Bahadur Singh Bhangu the complainant had no legal right to file the complaint on behalf of his son without any specific authority or any Special Power of Attorney.  There is no evidence to prove that he was the direct consumer of the OP.

6.             The CC has also filed an affidavit which is duly attested by Notary Public wherein in Para No.4 it is clearly mentioned that he has received all the documents/amount of his son and now nothing is due against the OP. He has further mentioned in this affidavit that he undertakes not to file any claim against the OP in future. The affidavit is duly signed by complainant Bahadur Singh Bhangu himself. Even he has appended his thumb impression on the affidavit. He has not challenged the veracity of the affidavit in any manner. In case he challenges the veracity or genuineness of that affidavit, in that event he has to approach the Civil Court since it require meticulous and detailed evidence.

7.             So without touching the other points of the complaint, the same is dismissed. However, no cost is imposed. Certified copies of the orders be supplied to the parties as per rules.  File be consigned to record in accordance with rules.

Announced

October 15, 2020

                                                                (Sanjiv Dutt Sharma)

                                                                President

(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)

Member