Haryana

Ambala

CC/80/2022

Ms. Navpreet Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S ACME Visa Solutions Pvt ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Shamsher Khatkar

06 Jun 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA

 

Complaint case no.	:	80 of 2022.
Date of Institution	:	08.03.2022.
Date of decision	:	06.06.2023

Ms Navpreet Kaur aged 25 years d/o Sh.Harpal Singh, VPO Ghsitpur, P.O.Kuldeep Nagar,District Ambala (Haryana).

                                                                                          ……..Complainant.

                                                Vs.

 

M/s ACME Visa Solutions Pvt. Ltd. H.O.3781/2 Jagjit Nagar Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana (Punjab) through its owner/proprietor.

                                                                            ….…. Opposite Party.

 

Before:       Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:       Shri Shamsher Khatkar, Adv. for the complainant.

                    Shri Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for the OP.

 

Order:       Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

 

1.                The complainant has filed this complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (for short Act) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’), making prayer to accept the complaint while directing the OP to refund the amount of Rs.47,200/- along with interest @18% p.a. from 30.11.2021 till actual payment and to pay Rs.2,50,000/- towards damages and compensation and Rs.25,000/- as cost of litigation.

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant being skilled and educated person decided to settle abroad and pursue her career on foreign land. She approached to the OP, where an employee of the OP Ms. Daljinder Kaur briefed her that “a candidate with a minimum score of 6 bands in ILETS (English Proficiency Exam) along with requisite academic qualification and work experience can qualify for the Permanent Residency Program of Canada”.It is further pleaded that the complainant appeared in ILETS exam and scored 6.5 bands in the test and after scoring the 6.5 bands, the complainant was asked to pay an amount of Rs.47200/- as processing fee for processing the application of complainant in immigration for Permanent Residency Program of Canada, which has  duly been paid by the complainant on 30.11.2021 through internet banking merchant ‘Phone Pe’ from her personal account  with transaction IDs bearing No.T2111301019202661211509,T2111301018598889790328,T2111301018351601005905. The complainant was also asked to submit her academic credentials and experience proof in PDF format, which have also been submitted by the complainant. On deposition of processing fee and submission of requisite documents, the complainant was asked to wait for few days  and the complainant waited for about two weeks and when no response has been received from the side of the OP, the complainant brought the matter into the notice of another official of the OP Ms. Shilpa Rajput, who stated that she (complainant) has been misinformed about the process, because requirement of Permanent Residency Program of Canada is 7 bands not 6 bands and she had also informed to the complainant her process has never been processed due to shortage of 0.5 ban in ILETS exam. It is further pleaded that after discussion with the another counselor of the OP, the complainant and her family members decided to give up the idea to settle in abroad and made a request to the OP to refund her full amount of Rs.47200/- which  has been deposited by the complainant for immigration process, which has never been initiated, but despite repeated requests the OP had failed to hear the genuine request of the complainant, which is an act of unfair trade practice, mal practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  The complainant got served a Regd. Ad. Legal Notice dated 7.2.2022 upon the OP, seeking refund of amount of Rs.47200/-, but neither the OP replied to the said legal notice nor refunded the amount of the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
3. objections that the complaint is not maintainable; the complainants have not come to this Hon’ble Commission with clean hands and has concealed the true and material facts.  On merits, controvert the plea taken by the OP, alleging therein that the complainant approached the OP and official of the OP clearly told the complainant needs of overall 7 bands in IELTS for PR in Canada and overall score of minimum 67 points to file the case, but the complainant secured only 6.5 bands in her IELTS exam.  The complainant assured the OP that she will again give the exam of IELTs and will definitely score 7 bands and consequently, the complainant deposited Rs.47200/- with the OP for the consultation charges of OP and it was told by the OP to the complainant that this fee is not refundable, which was duly acknowledged by the complainant. That’s why her file could not be processed for visa application. The complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.

4.           In the course of evidence, learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CA along with documents as Annexure C-1 to C-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP tendered affidavit of Ajit Singh, Branch Manager, ACME Visa Solution Pvt. Ltd. 3781/2, Jagjit Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Ludiana (Pb) as Annexure RW.1/A along with documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R.8 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the case file.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant during the course of his arguments reiterated to the version made into the complaint and submitted that the complainant had already informed the OP regarding securing of 6.5bands by her and then, despite that the OP received the amount of Rs.47200/- for processing the file of the complainant, but neither the file processed nor the amount has been refunded.
7.           On the other hand the learned counsel for OP reiterated to the version made into the written version and submitted that everything has already been detailed to the complainant and then, also the complainant had paid the amount of Rs.47,200/-, even, it was told to the complainant that the fee is non-refundable. He further submitted that the OP had deposited the amount of GST of Rs.7,200/- with the Government, as such the complainant paid Rs.40,000/- to it.
8.           The case of the OP is bases on surmises and conjectures, because as per the pleading of the OP on the assurance of the complainant to secure 7 bands in IELTS exam, the OP had got deposited Rs.47200/- from the complainant, however, from the perusal of chatting of whatsapp it is celar that the complainant had already told to the OP regarding securing of 6.5bands in IELTS.No one knows about the future and since no one is having any knowledge about the future, then, the charging/receiving of amount by the OP from the complainant is in itself clear cut negligence and deficiency in service on its part. Thus the OP is liable to refund the amount received from the complainant. From the tax invoice dated 01.12.2021, Annexure C-1, it is quite clear that OP has received in total Rs.47,200/-, (Rs.40,000/- + Rs.7,200 IGST) from the complainant. Since the amount of Rs.7,200/-, has been paid as IGST, which the OP has deposited with the Government, therefore, OP is liable to refund the amount of Rs.40,000/-, to the complainant. It is also liable to compensate the complainant for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by her alongwith litigation expenses.
9.           In view of the aforesaid discussions, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OP, in the following manner:-

(i) To refund the amount of Rs.40,000/-, to the complainant.

2. To pay Rs.3,000/-, as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.

(iii) To pay Rs.2,000/- as litigation expenses.

 

     The OP is further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days, from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, failing which the OP shall pay interest @ 6% per annum on the awarded amount, from the date of default, till realization. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced:- 06.06.2023

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President