West Bengal

Rajarhat

CC/513/2022

Ms Kousani Mukherjee, D/o. Saibal Mukherjee - Complainant(s)

Versus

Talento Aviation Service Private Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Amarnath sanyal

26 Sep 2022

ORDER

Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat (New Town )
Kreta Suraksha Bhavan,Rajarhat(New Town),2nd Floor
Premises No. 38-0775, Plot No. AA-IID-31-3, New Town,P.S.-Eco Park,Kolkata - 700161
 
Complaint Case No. CC/513/2022
( Date of Filing : 06 Sep 2022 )
 
1. Ms Kousani Mukherjee, D/o. Saibal Mukherjee
Residing at 79, Neogi Para Road, Baranagar, P.S- Baranagar, Kolkata-700036.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Talento Aviation Service Private Limited
Registered office at 3rd Floor , Block E/2-4, Netguru Building, Sector-V, Salt Lake, P.s- Bidhannagar East , Kolkata-700091.
2. Skylagoon Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd.
Registered office at 3rd Floor , Block E/2-4, Netguru Building, Sector-V, Salt Lake, P.s- Bidhannagar East , Kolkata-700091.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Partha Kumar Basu MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Sagarika Sarkar MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 26 Sep 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Today is fixed for order.

After giving consideration to the submissions advanced by the Ld. Advocate of the complainant and the contents of the complaint we see that the OPs run a business for providing job in Aviation Company to the aspiring youth in lieu of money. The complainant wanted to get a job in the category of cabin crew in any aviation company and contacted the OPs and an agreement was entered into and payment of Rs. 1, 50,000/- was made by the complainant. Not that application was made by the complainant before any aviation company and in case of employment the “appointment letter” operates as an “offer”. There was no offer a floated before the complainant from the end of any aviation company. Therefore, the question of job agreement in between the complainant and the employer has not arisen in this case. As a matter of fact the complainant could not and did not connect herself with any aviation company. Instead of she fell prey to the bait given a job trafficking racket. She could have approached police authority seeking relief. We are bound to see that under a lawful agreement the money was paid. There is nothing on record to show that the OPs were entrusted by any aviation company with the task for recruiting employees. In the absence of material showing the legal connection of the OPs with any aviation company, we are unable to hold a view that the OPs were empowered to collect money from the complainant and that the agreement which was made by the OPs with the complainant was unlawful one. She cannot get any relief from this Commission as per agreement under which payment was made was an unlawful one.

Hence it is ordered that the case be and the same is dismissed as being not admitted.

Let a plain copy be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR.

Dictated and Corrected by

[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Partha Kumar Basu]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sagarika Sarkar]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.