Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/85/2017

Rajinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Worldwide Immigration consultancy Services Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Jasdev S. Thind Adv.

01 Aug 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	85 of 2017
Date  of  Institution	:	24.01.2017
Date   of   Decision	:	01.08.2017

 

 

 

 

Rajinder Singh s/o Sh.Bir Singh, R/o V.P.O. Rit, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. 

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Service Ltd., SCO 2415-16, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.

2]  Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd., A-12, Industrial Area, Phase-VI, Mohali, through its Managing Director.

3]  Ms.Harshita, Emerald Education Consultancy & Immigration, Advisor Pvt. Ltd., Regd. Office SCO 112-113, 2^nd Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh.

                             ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

SHRI RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

Argued by: Sh.Jasdev S. Thind, Adv. for complainant.

            Sh.Amit Kumar, Authorised Agent for the OPs.

 

 

PER RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

          The facts in issue are that the complainant, holding degree of Master’s in Hotel Management, for making his career in Canada, approached OP No.1 in the year 2011, who suggested him to opt for Federal Skilled Programme known as Skilled Worker Category whereby the complainant would get the Permanent Residence status of Canada along with job within the country and it would cost him around Rs.6 lakhs. Thereafter, the complainant signed the contract on 17.11.2011 with WWICS and paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-.  It is averred that the complainant as per demand of OPs, has further deposited 4400 US $ (equivalent to Rs.2,23,00/-) in favour of Global Strategic Business Consultancy.  It is averred that the complainant in July, 2012 shocked to listen from the OPs that he cannot be sent to Canada under the programme through which he has applied as the Canadian Govt. has changed its policy and it is better to shift to another programme to get job, to which complainant agreed. Accordingly, the complainant enrolled himself in Ontario-Provincial Nominee Program as assured by the Opposite Party and at the time of execution of the contract, the complainant was asked to deposit Rs.1,12,360/-, which has been paid by him on 14.8.2012 against receipt. Thereafter, the Opposite Party supplied the complainant with Job Offer letter which was sent on behalf of Coppola Ristorante and the complainant was informed that as and when the date of interview is informed to OP No.1, the complainant will be informed as per schedule.  It is submitted that the complainant in Oct., 2012 received an e-mail from Opposite Party No.1 that that his interview is scheduled for 11.10.2012 and the complainant has to make an overseas call to the owner of the Coppola Ristorante for interview.  Then, the complainant, as per the instructions gave telephonic interview and accordingly in Dec., 2012, the complainant received a call from Opposite Parties to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- as his case is in final process and very soon he will get the appointment letter. The complainant deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with OPs on 12.12.2012 through cheque. It is submitted that the complainant kept on waiting for the response from the side of the OPs, but they did not make any contact and till July, 2014 no progress was done in the case of complainant. It is also submitted that the complainant had paid a total sum of Rs.5,72,360/- to the OPs and after waiting for so many years and having lost all hopes, the complainant applied for refund from the OPs, against which the OPs refunded an amount of Rs.3,87,000/-.  It is pleaded that later on the complainant met Ms.Mamta Sethi, an official of the OPs, now working with another company and she told that her real name is Ms.Harshita and that during her tenure in the OPs Office, the case of the complainant was never proceeded and the employees with the OPs Office are assigned fake identifications.  It is also pleaded that the complainant after knowing all the factual position felt cheated by the hands of OPs and that his remaining hard earned money of Rs.1,85,360/- has cunningly been forfeited by the OPs.  Alleging the said act & conduct of the OPs as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, hence this complaint has been filed. 

 

2]       The OPs have filed joint reply stating that the complainant had approached the OP Company for availing their professional services with regard to his Immigration case under AEJ category and later on the complainant shifted/converted his Immigration case to Ontario PNP Program and paid the professional fee as per the respective Contract of Engagements executed by the complainant. It is stated that the complainant after having enquired, had availed the professional services of the OP Company by entering into Two Contract of Engagements dated 17.11.2011 (Ann.R-1 & R-2) and as per the said Contract of Engagements, the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in total towards professional fee to the OP Company and out of the said amount, the complainant had given a consent letter for refund of Rs.50,000/- and accordingly received the said amount (Ann.R-3 colly).  It is also stated that as a matter of fact, the complainant had also availed the professional services of M/s GSBC, Dubai by entering into a Contract of Engagement dated 17.11.2011 (Ann.R-4) and as per Clause-3 of the said Contract, the complainant had paid an amount of US $ 4400 (Equivalent to Rs.2,23,200/-) to the said company towards professional fee. Furthermore, the complainant gave a consent letter for receiving an amount of US$ 4870 (equivalent to Rs.3,37,000/-) approved by M/s GSBC, Dubai and the same was paid to the complainant.  It is submitted that as the complainant had already received full & final settlement amount, therefore, this complaint is not maintainable. It is submitted that the complainant was interviewed by the representative of the Canadian Employer namely Coppola Ristorante St. Catharine’s on 11.10.2012 and final job offer was received on behalf of the complainant under Ontario PNP Program, thereafter, via e-mail dated 2.4.2013 (Ann.R-7), the Immigration Application on behalf of the complainant was further filed for obtaining Pre-Screening Certificate for the telephonic interview conducted by the Representative of the Canadian Employer and in the meantime, the complainant was asked to pay the second installment, as per the Contract of Engagement, however, the complainant instead of paying the same, applied for refund and accordingly, on the request of the complainant, the Immigration case of the complainant was deactivated and as per refund Clause of the Contract of Engagements, Rs.50,000/- ad US $ 4870 was approved towards refund and the same was duly received by the complainant after giving consent for the same.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.   

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have carefully examined the facts and pleadings along with entire evidence on record.

 

6]       The complainant was obsessed with an idea to settle in Canada.  He got his petition processed in November, 2011 for Canada under the then Provincial Federal Skilled Workers Category Programme and paid Rs.One Lakh and also executed an agreement dated 17.11.2011 (Ann.R-4).  However, after waiting for some months, he opted for Ontario PNP Program under NOC 0631 and entered into a fresh Contract of Engagement on 20.7.2012 (Ann.R-6) with Global Strategic Business Consultancy.  However, later when the case of the complainant for immigration in Canada was under process for Ontario PNP, the complainant himself abandoned his case for immigration to Canada as well as the consultancy services of Global Strategic Business Consultancy Company, which was following his petition.  The Contract of Engagement dated 17.11.2011 Clause 8, between the Complainant and WWICS specifically provided that the services provided by the Company being professional in nature, the entire fee for the services provided is non-refundable.  The Contract of Engagement dated 20.7.2017 between Complainant and Global Strategic Business Consultancy in Clause 9 of the Contract has similar condition regarding refund of service fee but the OPs as well as Global Strategic Business Consultancy Company to be fair enough to have settled the matter on payment of 50% of the professional services fee to the complainant as goodwill gesture.

 

7]       The complainant volunteered to execute consent letter dated 11.5.2015 (Ann.R-3) for receipt of Rs.50,000/- as full and final settlement with M/s Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Service Ltd.  He has also further executed Consent cum Full and final settlement letter dated 12.12.2016 for receipt of an amount of US $4870/- from M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy (Ann.R-3, Page/59).  The complainant has admittedly received Rs.50,000/- from M/s Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd., and US $ 4870/- from M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy i.e. a total sum of Rs.3,87,000/- till Feb., 2016 as agreed upon by him.  No one has thrusted upon his Consultancy Services on the complainant.  The complainant has himself, without any coercion and pressure opted for Canada Immigration though left the same before final approval of authorities concerned.

 

8]       The immigration approvals are being governed by Countries concerned as per their own rules and law of their land.  The Canadian Government in recent has been seen changing their immigration rules too frequently as per their need.  Though lakh of people who were eager to transfer to Canada have gone thorough successfully and settled there, but there are people also who are not fortunate enough to find an early clearance and left the queue for want of enough patience for such long wait.

 

9]       The complainant admittedly has taken the chance but was not courageous enough to withstand the furry of delay in approval of his case by Canadian Government and as such lost the battle and also suffered loss in terms of money, which he has made for engagement of professional consultants. 

 

10]      The complainant has not produced any evidence on record, which may substantiate any allegation of deficiency of service in the consultancy services, which he had engaged for his immigration case for Canada.  The complainant has engaged M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy on 20.7.2012 and paid it the constancy service charges but has not impleaded it as respondent in this complaint.

 

11]      The contentions raised by the complainant regarding reimbursement of full amount, which he has paid as consultation charges, are misconceived, untenable and without merits.  The complainant has already received Rs.3,87,000/- i.e. 50% of the consultation charges etc. as agreed upon by him as final settlement (Ann.R-3) and as such, is barred by principle of Estopple to claim the amount as claimed herein. In the present complaint beyond and above what he agreed upon and received by way of settlement before coming to this Forum. 

 

12]      Keeping into consideration the facts & circumstances, as comes forth by way of careful analytical examination of the entire evidence on record, the complaint is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.     

           The copy of this order be forwarded to the parties and file be consigned to record room.

Announced

1^st August, 2017 

                                       Sd/-

                                                         (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

                    

 

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                          (PRITI MALHOTRA)

                                                                                      MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER