Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/199/2020

Satnam Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Sky World Immigration Services Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Amarbir Dhaliwal & Sunit K. Chauhan

15 Dec 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	199/2020
Date of Institution	:	18.03.2020
Date of Decision	:	15.12.2021

 

                                       

                       

 

Satnam Kaur w/o Sh. Jeevan Singh, VPO Shri Bhaini Sahib, Distt.Ludhiana, Pb.

…Complainant

Versus

1.     M/s Sky World Immigration Services Pvt. Ltd., SCO 10-11-12, Top Floor, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh through its Directors/Authorized Signatory/ Authorized Representative.

2.     Gitanjali Sharma, Director M/s Sky World Immigration Services Pvt. Ltd ., SCO 10-11-12, Top Floor, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh.

IInd Address: House No. 60, Sector 38-A, Chandigarh.

3.     Rajiv Sharma, Director, M/s Sky World Immigration Services Pvt. Ltd ., SCO 10-11-12, Top Floor, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh.

IInd Address: House No. 60, Sector 38-A, Chandigarh.

4.     Sachin Madaan, Director, M/s Sky World Immigration Services Pvt. Ltd ., SCO 10-11-12, Top Floor, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh.

IInd Address: Sachin Madaan son of Sh. Surinder Pal, House No. 2759, Ist Floor, Phase-7, Distt. SAS Nagar Mohali.Pb.

…. Opposite Parties

BEFORE:
		SHRI RAJAN DEWAN,	PRESIDENT
		SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA,	MEMBER
		SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Argued by:-
	Sh.Abhilash Bhtacharya, Adv. Proxy for Sh.Amarbir Dhaliwal, Adv. for the complainant
	OPs exparte.

 

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

1.         Briefly stated, the facts of case as alleged by the complainant are that OP No.1 is engaged in immigration business and provides various consultancy and other immigration related services. Being qualified as MMC (IT), she wanted to go abroad to fulfill her dreams.  She along with her father approached OP No. 2 & 3 who fascinated the complainant by stating that she is eligible and fulfills all the criteria for permanent residency in Canada. They further assured that her IELTS score test given on 16^th July 2016 was sufficient to qualify the permanent residency and she did not need to give it again. Having trust and faith upon the promises/assurances given by the OPs, she engaged the services of the OPs for her immigration to Canada. They assured that they will procure the Labour Market Opinion, Canada for permanent residency purposes and it will take around 9-10 months for the same with a total fee of Rs.8,50,000/ -. The OPs alleged to have demanded an advance payment of Rs.3,00,000/- out of which she paid Rs.60,000 in cash to OPs No.2 to 4.  She paid Rs.10,000/- through receipt No.305 dated 05.11.2016 and Rs.1,20,000/- through receipt No. 306 dated 06.11.2016.  However, they issued receipt of the earlier payment of Rs.60,000/- paid in cash, for an amount of Rs. 30,000/- vide receipt No. 382 dated 8.11.2016.  Thereafter, she alleged to have paid Rs.1,10,000/- within a period of 15 days.  In all, the complainant alleged to have paid Rs.3,00,000/ - against receipts Annexures C-2 to C-4.   The OPs executed the contract dated 08.11.2016 (Annexure C-5) with the complainant.  Subsequently, she made repeated requests and reminders to the OP No.2, 3 & 4 to know about the status of her application and shown her readiness and willingness to perform any due formality on her part but they lingered on the matter one pretext to another and failed to provide any promised services and even her application for the immigration has not been processed. It has further been averred that due to the delay on the part of the OPs even the IELTS test score of the complainant had expired as the same were valid only for 1-½ year. Finally, on 12.07.2018, she through her father made the complaint against OPs No.2 to 4 with the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana (Annexure C-6) where they have admitted the payment of Rs. 2,35,000/- instead of Rs.3,00,000/-.  It has further been averred that the Opposite Parties have not provided any kind of services in any manner whatsoever even after pocketing a huge sum of money. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.   
2.         Despite due service through publication in newspaper “Rozana Chardikalan, Patiala dated 07.10.2021, the Opposite Parties failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof they were ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 11.11.2021.
3.         We have heard the Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the documents on record.
4.         In her exparte evidence, the complainant has tendered her detailed affidavit in support of the averments made in the complaint.  Annexure C-5 is the agreement dated 08.11.2016 and a perusal of which reveals that the complainant had availed the consultancy services of the OPs for the purposes of applying visa i.e. Canada PR. The complainant alleged to have deposited a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with the OPs on different dates. However, Sh.Sachin Maddan r/o House No. 2759, 1^st  Floor, Phase-7, Distt. SAS Nagar Mohali, Punjab in his statement made to the Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana has stated that he had received Rs.2,35,000/- from the complainant for processing the immigration file to Canada PR.  Thus, the complainant is held entitled to Rs.2,35,000/- only instead of Rs.3,00,000/- as claimed in the complaint in the absence of any reliable documentary evidence to this effect.
5.         It will not be out of place to mention here that the Opposite Parties did not appear to contest the case despite due service and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. Non-appearance of the Opposite Parties shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted & un-controverted. Moreover, the OPs have failed to render any kind of services to the complainant despite receipt of the huge amount from her, which itself amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.  In our considered view, the OPs have got no right to retain the hard earned money of the complainant especially when they have failed to render any services to the complainant.
6.         In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be allowed against the OPs and the same is accordingly allowed. The OPs are directed as under:-

[i]            To refund Rs.2,35,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the respective dates of its payment till its actual realization.

[ii]          To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony & physical harassment to the complainant.

 [iii]        To pay Rs.11,000/- as costs of litigation.

7.         This order be complied with by the OPs within 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the amount at Sr.No.(ii) above shall also carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of this order till its actual payment besides compliance of other directions.
8.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

 

Announced 15/12/2021
	Sd/- (RAJAN DEWAN) PRESIDENT
	Sd/-
	(PRITI MALHOTRA) MEMBER
	Sd/-
	(B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER