Haryana

Karnal

CC/295/2022

Sandeep HUDA Director Of R.V. Education And Migration Consultant - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Jinal Shah - Opp.Party(s)

Jaswant Singh

13 Jun 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                     Complaint No. 295 of 2022

                                                      Date of instt.26.05.2022

                                                      Date of Decision 13.06.2022

 

Sandeep Huda Director of R.V. Education and Migration consultant SCO no.163, New Grain Market, Karnal.

 

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     M/s Jindal Shah authorized signatory E.C.C. 214 seven work space 2^nd floor Ratnam Complex opp. Sapphire complex C.G. Road Ahmedbad-9, India. Moble no.98333-10877, 98333-10377 now shifted to 207 Ratnam Complex opposite yes Bank CG Road Ahmedabad-9.

2.     E.C.C. Education consultant Canada through its authorized signatory Ms Jindal Shah at email Id Mumbai@eccccanada.com.

 

                                                                   …..Opposite Parties.

 

      Complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

 

 Present: Shri Jaswant Singh, counsel for the complainant.

                                        

                (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                        The complainant has filed the present complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs) on the averments that complainant dealing as agent in the name and style RV Education and Migration Consultants. After consultation with the students who wants to go abroad contract with another agency/agent who have link with abroad university and after completing all documents and other formalities of the student sent them abroad through OPs no.1 and 2 on commission basis and earned his livelihood. In this way by sending the student in abroad through OPs no.1 and 2 availing their services for money consideration and thus became the consumer as defined under section 2 clause II of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The complainant shared the documents of student Gagan visits to OP no.2 through its authorized signatory Ms. Jindal Shah through email who got offer letter on 26.11.2020 for Bradford University (United Kingdom) and the student deposited his tuition fee of amount 4638 GBP for his course of Facility of Management Law and Social Science duration 3 years 6 months the course star from 11.01.2021 and got visa student travel to UK on 21th December 2020. Thereafter, complainant asked the OPs through email on 12.07.2021 and have done continuously follow up via email ECC i.e. OP no.2 through its authorized signatory but ECC has not been paid the 70% commission of the earned commission by the ECC to the complainant.

2.             Further, complainant shared the documents of the student of Vikas for U.K. under course certificate in business studies for January, 2021 and sent all the document after completing all the formalities to Ms. Jindal Shah via email for getting the offer letter of the abovesaid student and student has deposited his tuition fee 12500 GBP on 22.09.2020 and studying there. Similarly, complainant also shared the documents of student Simran to OP no.2 at email Id for offer letter of the student and thereafter got the offer letter for Simran on 03.10.2020 Humbar College Canada under course business administration in advance diploma duration 3 years for January, 2021 start from 14 May, 2021 and finish date is December 2022 and student deposited her fee 15734 CAD on 12.11.2020 and got visa approval on 01.04.2021. It is further averred that complainant already sent abroad two students namely Sandeep and Ankush for U.K. through OP no.2 and complainant got 70% commission of the two student from OP no.2 and having trust upon the said agency, complainant arranged these above noted three student Gagan and Vikas for U.K. and Simran for Canada and all three student has already deposited their required fee to their concerned university and studying their respective university and OP no.2 already got the commission of the abovesaid student from the university, but did not pay single penny to the complainant till today. Complainant requested the OPs through email many times to pay the commission of the complainant, but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and failed to pay the same. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 02.11.2021 to the OPs but it also did not yield any result. In this way there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

3.             Arguments on the point of admissibility heard.

4.             As per version of the complainant, he is running the business of Migration Consultant and sent the student abroad on study visa through OP No. 1 and 2 and availed his services for consideration of money and thereby became a consumer as defined under Section 2 (7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

5.             Now the question arises for consideration before us whether complainant falls under the definition of ‘consumer’ or not as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, 2019?

6.             The definition of consumer is defined in Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which is reproduced as under:-

(7) “Consumer” means any person who-

(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promise or partly paid and partly promises, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose.” or

(ii)  hires or avails of  any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who(hires or avails of) the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purposes.

Explanation- For the purposes of this clause-

(a) the expression “commercial purpose” does not include use by a person of goods bought and used by him and services availed by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self employment.”

(b) the expressions “buys any goods” and “hires or avails any services” include offline or online transactions through electronic means or by teleshopping or direct selling or multi-level marketing;

 

In the present complaint, complainant has neither hired nor availed of any service of the OPs. Rather, the complainant is the service provider. Further, on perusal of the complaint, the complainant's activity appears to be commercial, thus, in view of the above, the complainant does not come under the definition of consumer. Therefore, the present complaint devoid of any merits and deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated: 13.06.2022

 

                                                                President,

                                                      District Consumer Disputes

                                                      Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 

            (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary) 

                   Member