Complaint No: 54 of 2021.
Date of Institution: 18.02.2021.
Date of order: 03.10.2023.
Malkeet Singh S/o Harbans Singh resident of Village Mand, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. Pin Code - 143521
…............Complainant.
VERSUS
1. NRI Marriage Beauro, First Floor, Tower No. 93, Near Kale Da Dhaba, Court Chowk, Amritsar – 143001, through its Incharge.
2. Indian MATRIMO, Ludhiana, K-10 Tower Unit Number 508 & 509 Fifth Floor, Ludhiana - 141001 (Near Federal Bank)
….Opposite parties.
Complaint U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Present: For the Complainant: Sh.Narinder Sharma, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties No.1: Sh.Parampreet Singh, Office Incharge.
Opposite Parties No.2: Given up.
Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
ORDER
Lalit Mohan Dogra, President
Malkeet Singh, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against NRI Marriage Beauro etc. (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant used to watch the Facebook app where in the month of November - December 2019 the complainant saw an advertisement of opposite parties on Facebook. It is further pleaded that he opened the site of opposite parties and filled form i.e. by giving detail of his bio data, photographs, phone number on the website of the opposite parties. It is further pleaded that thereafter the employees of the opposite parties make telephone calls to enquire the requirements of the complainant and they motivated him to deposit the fees on their matrimonial site. It is further pleaded that they also make promise that they will arrange a suitable match of a NRI girl for the purpose of marriage within short period. It is further submitted that on the allurement of opposite parties, the complainant has transferred Rs.16,575/- from his A/c No. 5099214162090 of State Bank of India in the account of opposite party No. 2 bearing A/e No. 000416391171. It is further submitted that the payment of Rs.16,575/- was transferred on dated 04.01.2020 in the app of opposite party by transfer UPI/CR/000413687061/MalkitS/PUNB/ 9501050105/ mand. It is alleged that after the opposite party had sent the photographs of NRI girls but when complainant asked the opposite party for arrange the meeting with the said girl, but the opposite party demanded more money for this purpose. It is further pleaded that thereafter complainant many a times make phone calls to opposite party and requested them to arrange the meeting with the NRI girl, but the opposite party linger on the matter with one pretext or the other and in the month of March 2020 due to Covid-19 pandemic all the offices were closed. It is further alleged that during the period of corona the complainant moved many complaints through email and requested the opposite party to return his hard earned money but the opposite party did not give any reply and now the opposite party flatly refused to return the money which they received from complainant on the excuse that they will arrange the marriage with NRI Girl, but they failed to do so. It is further alleged that the opposite parties has made false promises with complainant only to grab the money and misguide the youth. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. It is further pleaded that there is a clear cut deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and negligence in services and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite parties to return the amount of Rs.16,575/- alongwith interest paid by complainant to opposite party and also directed the opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- as mental pain, agony and harassment at the hands of opposite party and Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses, in the interest of justice.
3. Upon notice, the opposite party No.1 appeared through their office incharge and filing their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is wholly misconceived groundless and unsustainable in law and is liable to be dismissed as such. It is further pleaded that the Hon'ble court has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon dispute involved in the complaint and it is not consumer dispute and does not fall within the ambit of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, (here-in-after called the said ‘act’). It is further pleaded that proceedings initiated by the complainant under the act are null and void and without jurisdiction and the definitions of the "Complainant", "Complaint", "Consumer Dispute" and "Services" as defined under the said Act do not cover the claim arising under the present dispute and from the aforesaid definitions, the complainant is not Consumer and the controversy involved is not a ‘Consumer Disputer’. It is further pleaded that the present complaint is baseless and flagrant abuse of process of law to harass and blackmail the answering opposite party and the complainant has no locus standi to initiate the present proceedings and the complaint is frivolous, vexatious and liable to be dismissed. It is further pleaded that the complaint is bad for non-joiner of necessary and proper party and is liable to be dismissed on this score alone. It is pleaded that the service delivered to the complainant was from Canada. It is further pleaded that infact we don't have any service department in India due to privacy policy and data secrecy. It is further pleaded that as the matter of fact we only have branch office in Amritsar where the customers can make payment in cash or through cheque. It is further pleaded that office in India has nothing more to serve regarding NRI Marriage Bureau. It's the NRI Media and Marketing office for news purposes. It is further pleaded that the complainant never visited office in Amritsar / India, he made the payment online on his own consent. It is further pleaded that as a matter of fact it is clearly mentioned in pay back policy that the fee deposited is not refundable. It is clearly mentioned on the receipt sent to the complainant. It is further pleaded that infact it was also mentioned on the receipt that the amount paid in superior / personalized service is not refundable. It is further pleaded that it is to bring into the knowledge of Hon'ble court that due to Lockdown in month of March 2020 the profiles lined up to contact him for his matrimonial ID put halt on service delivery and moreover our offices were also closed till June 2020. It is further pleaded that our management announced the team to provide 1 month's service extra as complementary services for the members who suffered due to pandemic. It is further pleaded that his Relationship manager contacted him but he misbehaved with the personnel and sent written abusive messages, rather listening to the announcement call, he started abusing. It is further pleaded that he was warned by the caller of the team but he continued in the same shameful manner. It is further pleaded that it was his well thought out plot to harass the caller/ whatsapp chatter and he deleted the messages where he wrote abusive language for our female employee Ms. Amika. It is further pleaded that if he was not abusing Ms. Amika then what was the purpose of deleting the messages? It is further pleaded that after his unethical activity, as per our policy and terms and conditions, our team suspended his membership and stopped his service so that he couldn't treat with disrespectful attitude to our other members. It is admitted by the complainant that he used the same service at other matrimonial site and they talked to me in very rude manner. It is further pleaded that this clears that the complainant has discourteous communication skills. It is further pleaded that it was our perceptive that we just suspended his membership from further conversation. It is further pleaded that due to Pandemic we should not waste the valuable time of the court otherwise the petition was supposed to be filed from our end where the customer abused / used unethical sentences for our female employee Ms. Amika.
On merits, the opposite party No.1 have reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in services on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. Opposite party No.2 given up vide order dated 28.10.2021.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Malkeet Singh, (Complainant) as Ex.C-1 alongwith other documents as Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-6.
6. The opposite party No.1 has filed affidavit of Sh. Parampreet Singh, (Employee of NRI Media and Marketing INC, Amritsar) as Ex.OPW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.OP-1/1 to Ex.OP-1/7.
7. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
8. Written arguments not filed by both the parties.
9. Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant had seen advertisement of opposite parties on facebook and opened the site of the opposite parties and filled form. The opposite parties promised that they will arrange a suitable match of a NRI girl for the purpose of marriage within short period. It is further argued that on being allured complainant had paid Rs.16,575/- to the opposite parties on 04.01.2020. It is further argued that opposite parties had sent photographs of NRI girls but no meeting was arranged. Opposite parties failed to arrange meeting and demanded more and more money from the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
10. On the other hand representative of the opposite party No.1 has argued that payment of Rs.16,575/- is admitted. It is further argued that complainant offered extra money to the service manager in Canada and recording where the complainant offered extra money to the service manager has been placed on record. It is further argued that it is clearly mentioned in the pay back policy that fee deposited is not refundable. It is further argued that opposite party No.1 had announced to provide 1 month's service extra as a complementary service due to Corona Virus Pandemic. It is further argued that complainant was apprised about the same but complainant misbehaved and used filthy language to the service manager.
11. We have heard the Ld. counsel for the complainant and representative of the opposite party No.1 and gone through record. It is admitted fact that complainant had availed the services of the opposite parties and made pay of Rs.16,575/-. It is further admitted fact that opposite parties could not arrange any matrimonial proposal for the complainant. The only disputed point for adjudication before this Commission is whether the opposite parties can retain the amount of Rs.16,575/- deposited by the complainant or not. The only plea of the opposite party No.1 is that the said amount is not refundable as per their policy. Perusal of file shows that the complainant has no signed any such policy as claimed by opposite party No.1 and since it is proved on record that the opposite parties could not arrange any matrimonial proposal for meeting with any NRI girl to the complainant as such we are of the view that opposite parties have no right to withheld the amount of Rs.16,575/- deposited by the complainant. Accordingly, we are of the view that complainant has fully proved deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
12. Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party No.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.16,575/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of filing of the complaint till realization within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. As far as the plea of opposite party No.1 regarding use of abusive language is concerned. Opposite party No.1 is at liberty to lodge complaint with appropriate authority at their end.
13. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases.
14. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President.
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
Oct. 03, 2023 Member.
*YP*
