Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/160/2019

Mr. Gulshan Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd. (WWICS Ltd.) - Opp.Party(s)

Pankaj Chandgothia Adv.

15 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint  No	:	160 of 2019
Date  of  Institution	:	26.03.2019
Date   of   Decision	:	15.05.2023

 

 

 

 

 

1]  Gulshan Kumar s/o Sh.Chaman Lal, House No.104, Sun Shine Avenue, Backside GNDU Campus, LadheWali Road, Jalandhar 144007

 

2]  Saran Preet w/o Sh.Gulshan Kumar, House No.104, Sun Shime Avenue, Backside GNDU Campus, LadheWali Road, Jalandhar 144007

 

             …..Complainants

 

Versus

 

1]  Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd. (WWICS Ltd.), SCO 2415-16, Near Aroma Hotel, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh through its Director.

 

2]  Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd. (WWICS Ltd.), Head Office: A-12, Industrial Area, Phase-VI, Mohali through its Director.

 

3]  M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy, c/o Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd., A-12, Industrial Area, Phase-VI, Mohali through its Director.

 

     ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  MR.AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU       PRESIDENT

        MR.B.M.SHARMA                  MEMBER

                               

Argued by   :  Sh.Pankaj Chandgothia, Counsel of complainant

    Sh.Raman Walia, Counsel of OPs

 

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

 

         The complainants filed present complaint pleading that they hired the professional services of OPs for immigration to Canada under Federal Skilled worker Class – Express Entry in April, 2016 and after discussion, entered into a contract with OPs on 15.4.2016 (Ann.C-2) for processing their immigration case under FSWC Category for Canada and paid an amount of Rs.1,03,050/- vide receipt dated 15.4.2016 (Ann.C-1). The OPs also caused the complainant to enter into another contract with M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy- OP No.3 (Ann.C-3) on 15.4.2016.  The complainant paid another sum of Rs.41,465/- as demanded by OPs (Ann.C-4) and the receipt of the said transaction equivalent to $600 has been issued as Ann.C-5.  It is stated that the complainants had to incur extra expenses on IELTS, MCC docs and visits to Chandigarh from Jalandhar. It is also stated that the complainants filled all required forms provided to them by the OPs, but nothing happened in the case. Later in Jan., 2017, the OPs told that it would be better to apply under PNP Programme, which shows that OPs had yet not processed their earlier application.  It is pleaded that under the false hope provided by the OPs, the complainant kept dreaming to start their new life in Canada, they took up the mandatory IELTS test once again and scored goods score (Ann.C-6).  The complainants also get medical certification from the Medical Council of Canada and had to spent a lot of money on this (Ann.,C-7).  It is also pleaded that in Jan., 2017, the OPs demanded another amount of Rs.94,300/- and $600/- on the pretext of applying under PNP Programme for Canada, which they complainant paid vide receipt dated 24.1.2017 (Ann.C-8).  The OPs also caused the complainant to sign and enter into another contract dated 24.1.2017 under Bronze Package allegedly for refilling PNP (Ann.C-9).  Thereafter, the complainants kept on visiting OPs and enquiring the outcome of their applications but they did not pay any heed and finally started making excuses that the profiles of the complainants were not suitable, hence rejected, whereas the case of the complainants was never filed with the concerned authorities or concerned embassy.  It is stated that the OPs did not render any service to the complainant as it would have started only if application was filed for processing with concerned embassy. It is pleaded that when the complainants stressed for refund of entire amount, the OPs offered a meager amount of Rs.50,000/- only. Therefore, the present complaint has been filed alleging the above said act & conduct of the OP as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

 

2]      After service of notice upon the OPs No.1 to 3, the OPs No.1 to 3 appeared and filed their joint written version and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.90,000/- only to the OP Company towards retainer fee  which is non-refundable as per Refund Clause of Contract of Engagement.  Further the amount of US $600 equivalent to Rs.41,465/- was paid by the complainants to M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy, Dubai towards professional fee, which is a separate legal entity. Thereafter, the Immigration application on behalf of complainant was prepared and Express Entry (EE) profile of complainant was submitted on 9.11.2016 with CRS Score 380 with Canadian High Commission which was valid for one year, but as the CRS score of the complainant was less for invitation to apply as the Express Entry, the complainant was informed to increase his CRS score by improving IELTS.  It is submitted that in the meantime the complainant shown his interest to apply under Provincial Nominee Stream-Express Entry Program and accordingly entered into a Contract dated 24.1.2017 and paid an amount of Rs.82,300/- only towards professional fee, which is non-refundable and an amount of Rs.12,300/- was paid towards Service Tax.  It is pleaded that the CRS score of the complainant was 408 and he could not score enough to meet the cut off score 470 and in the meantime, the Express Entry Profile of the complainant was expired on 10.11.2017 after completion of one year, so the application on behalf of complainant was re-lodged with updated documents on 25.11.2017 and complainant was requested to improve his IELTS score, which he could not submit.  It is further pleaded that the Express Entry Profile of the complainant was again expired on 25.11.2018 after completion of one year, which was informed to the complainant.  However, later on the complainant, started asking for refund.  It is stated that though the complainant was not entitled for any refund, but as a good will, an amount of Rs.50,000/- was approved and offered to the complainant, but he complainant instead of collecting the said amount, filed the present complaint. It is also stated that the OPs have duly performed their part of the contract by preparing and processing the immigration case of the complainant twice and even is still ready and willing to re-lodge his application under Online Express Entry Pool provided the complainant submits his improved IELTS result with required bands in order to increase his CRS Score. Pleading no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice and denying other allegations, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]      Replication has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in complaint and controverting that of OPs made in their reply.

4]      Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5]      We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have perused the entire record including written arguments.

 

6]      The complainant admittedly availed the professional services of the OPs for her Permanent Immigration Case under ‘Federal Skilled Worker Category – Express Entry’ for Canada and to arrange Permanent Resident Visa in Canada.  The payment of Rs.1,03,050/- (Ann.C-1) and Rs.41,465/- (Ann.C-4) made by the complainant to OPs is also proved.  It is also admitted that thereafter the case of the complainant was processed under another category by the OPs i.e. Provincial Nominee Stream-Express Entry Program and another payment of Rs.94,300/- has been made to OPs (Ann.C-8). However, the OPs have failed to provide the promised professional services & guidance to the complainant for which their services have been hired.

 

7]      The plea of the OPs is that the complainant has failed to provide IELTS score required under the said category.

8]      This submission of the OPs is not acceptable. The complainant has a very powerful right under The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 i.e. Right to Information.  In the present complaint, the OPs have not informed the complainant that he required at least 470 Scores in IELTS to be eligible for the concerned category.  The OPs by withholding this vital information committed an act of unfair trade practice besides remaining deficient in rendering adequate service to the complainant. The OPs being professional agency was duty bound to make it clear to the complainant as to what score he requires to achieve in IELTS under the said categories. It is clear that they failed to properly guide the complainant for which they have charged him. Thus, the OPs have failed to provide the professional services to the complainant and therefore committed deficiency in service as well as indulged into unfair trade practice.

 

9]      The offer of Rs.50,000/- made by the OPs to the complainant against his claim is not adequate and in our opinion, the fee so paid by the complainant to the OPs deserves to be refunded. 

 

10]     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be partly allowed and the same is accordingly partly allowed. The OPs are directed to refund an amount of Rs.2,38,815/- to the complainant within 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, failing which the OPs shall also be liable to pay interest @9% per annum from the date of filing this complaint till the date of its actual realization.

11]     The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed off accordingly.

        Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

15^th May, 2023                                                                            

Sd/-

 (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER