| ORDER | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA
C.C. No. 272 of 05-07-2013 Decided on 11-10-2013
Harsangeet Singh aged about 23 years S/o Sh. Ajaib Singh R/o Gali No. 3. Main Baba Deep Singh Nagar, Bathinda. …...Complainant Versus WWICS Global Resettlement Solutions, (Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd.), 2nd Floor, Grover Complex, G.T. Road, New Hanuman Chowk, Bathinda 151 001, through its Branch Manager/Incharge. WWICS Global Resettlement Solutions, (Wordlwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd ) A-12, Industrial Area, Phae-6, Mohali 160055, through Chairman & Managing Director/Director/President/GM
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member For the Complainant : Sh. Ashok Gupta, counsel for the complainant. For the opposite parties : Sh. Ajitinder Singh Chahal, counsel for the opposite parties.
O R D E R
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that the complainant passed his B.P.T. in the year 2011 and he went to the opposite parties and got their opinion about post graduation in physiotherapy. The opposite parties influenced the complainant that they would get him admitted in Newzealand and got Rs. 6741/- on 4-10-2012. The opposite parties could not get the admission for complainant in Newzealand. Thereafter the opposite parties influenced the complainant to pay Rs. 14,600/- more for getting admission in Canada. The complainant finding no other solution paid Rs. 14,600/- on 22-2-2013 and deposited all the required/demanded document i.e. 10th D.M.C., 10+2 D.M.C. Bachalor degree and mark sheet. The complainant paid Rs. 550/- to Baba Farid University for translation of degree and letter of recommendation. The complainant also submitted the statement of purpose and resume of ILETS with passport copies. The complainant alleged that he submitted four sets of all the documents to the opposite parties, but his file was not sent to the University of Canada. The complainant gave all the documents including required fee to Shruti Maheshwari who was the Incharge of the branch at Bathinda, but she did not forward his file. When the complainant came to know about not forwarding of his file, he protested and contacted Mr. Negi, who was the Incharge of Mohali Branch. Mr. Negi directed the complainant to submit five copies of each documents, including the file which was given on March, 2013, but despite of submission of all the documents, nothing was done by the opposite parties. The complainant further alleged that the opposite parties have cheated him as they did not forward his case to the University despite submission of required documents and deposit of Rs. 6741/- and Rs. 14,606/- vide receipts No. 12021263 dated 4-10-2012 and 1202131059 dated 22-2-2013 respectively. At the time of receiving the payment, the opposite parties committed to get the admission for post graduation in physiotherapy, which they failed to do so as vide letter dated 13-2-2013. The complainant further alleged that his precious and valuable one year has been lost due to fault of the opposite parties. The complainant further alleged that he visited the opposite parties many times and requested them to send his file for admission or in the alternative to refund the entire amount alongwith interest, but to no effect. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund Rs. 14,600/- and 6741/- with interest; pay Rs. 3,00,000/- as compensation alongwith cost of this complaint and return the documents of the complainant lying with them. The opposite parties filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the complainant himself has failed to provide the required documents to the opposite parties who already had got the conditional offer letter from AUT University for study in graduate diploma in health science , which was conveyed to the complainant vide e-mail dated 19-12-2012. The complainant vide consent letter dated 5-10-2012 had specifically asked for getting admission in AUT university which was arranged by the opposite parties. As per letter of the University, the complainant was to provide the copy of passport or birth certificate, copy of transcript and completion certificate awarding the bachelor of physiotherapy and copy of police clearance which the complainant failed to provide. The opposite parties have pleaded that the present case is of disinterest and non-submission of documents as the complainant after getting the conditional offer letter from AUT university, Newzealand had sought bank loan in order to pay the tuition and other fees of the university, but the bank refused to give him the education loan on graduate diploma. As per request of the complainant made vide consent letter dated 17-10-2012, his application was also sent to Wintec Institute of Technolozy Newzealand, but the complainant again failed to provide the documents as he was unable to obtain the loan. As per clause 12 & 13 of the contract of engagement dated 24-09-2012, the complainant is not entitled to any refund being a case of non submission of documents and disinterest. The opposite parties have further pleaded that the complainant after having failed to take admission in Newzealand on account of non disbursement of the loan by the bank thereafter submitted his consent letter 4-4-2013 to apply in FD university, Vancouver, Canada for September, 2013 intake and accordingly the same was applied. The opposite parties vide email dated 4-4-2013, asked the complainant to provide the admission documents for admission process and vide email dated 17-4-2013, he was also advised to submit his experience certificate, but again the complainant failed to submit the documents. The opposite parties vide email dated 22-4-2013, against requested the complainant and his father to submit the pending documents before the deadline, but no documents were provided by the complainant due to which another email dated 26-4-2013 was sent telling them about the urgency in submitting the pending documents as the admission dead line was 1-5-2013 for September, 2013 intake and it was also told that the company will not be responsible for any delay or loss. The complainant thereafter again sent another consent letter dated 20-03-2013 whereby he requested to submit his admission application for Georgian College and Centennial College, Canada, but later on due to the reasons known to the complainant and his father, they directed the company to not to process the application either in Georgian College or in any other college and ultimately, they refused to get admission in any of the colleges. The opposite parties have further pleaded that the main problem of the complainant was that the bank was not giving them the loan for education purposes and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in respect of the case of the complainant. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. The submission of the complainant is that the opposite parties filled the form of the complainant for the post graduation degree in Auckland, but they failed to get admission for him. The opposite parties again allured the complainant for getting the post graduation degree from FDU university by making a lame excuses to save their skin, but failed to get the admission. The opposite parties insisted the complainant to get the admission in diploma, for which he did not agree as he was already holding the degree and wanted to pursue post graduation degree in Auckland. The complainant further submitted that he never gave any consent for FD university, Vancouver, Canada for September, 2013 intake. The opposite parties have failed to forward the file of the complainant despite submission of all the documents and deposit of necessary charges. On the other hand, the submission of the opposite parties is that the complainant himself approached them to take admission in graduate diploma in health science in Newzealand and accordingly they conveyed him all the terms and conditions, required documents and all the charges etc. After receipt of the amount, the opposite parties duly sent the application form of the complainant and requested him many times to complete and submit all the requisite documents vide Ex. R-6, Ex. R-10, Ex. R-11, Ex. R-12 and finally vide e-mail dated 26-4-2013 conveyed about the urgency in submitting the pending documents as the admission dead line was 1-5-2013 for September, 2013. The opposite parties also conveyed the complainant that if he fails to submit the pending documents, then the opposite parties will not be responsible for any delay or loss, but despite that, the complainant failed to complete/submit the requisite documents to the opposite parties. The opposite parties have further submitted that the complainant himself was negligent in co-operating the opposite parties and also negligent to provide the required documents to them, hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The plea taken by the opposite parties is that the complainant has not submitted the required documents as he failed to get loan from the bank, but no document has been produced on file by them to show that the complainant wanted to avail education loan in order to pay the tuition and other fees of the University or loan has been declined by the bank. Ex. OP-1/7 is the contract of engagement which was executed between the complainant and the opposite parties on 24-09-2012. Vide Ex. OP-1/1 on 12-12-2012, the complainant received conditional letter from AUT University for graduate diploma in health science commencing from 4th March, 2013. Vide Ex. OP-1/2, on 19-12-2012 the opposite parties asked the complainant to submit the required documents for un-conditional offer letter. Thereafter on 29-01-2013, office of opposite party No. 1 sent e-mail to opposite party No. 2 that bank refused to give education loan to the complainant on graduate diploma course and now he wants to apply his case for master degree course, but no such document has been produced on file by the opposite parties to prove their this version. Thereafter the opposite parties obtained consent letter from the complainant Vide Ex. OP-1/8 for master of administrative science (MAS) from Faileigh Dickinson university, Vancouver (FDU). Ex. OP-1/9 is the application for graduate admission of FDU Vancouver. A perusal of this documents reveals that it has been clearly mentioned in it :- “..Thank you for your interest in Fairleigh Dickinson University. This application can be completed by students applying for graduate programs at FDU-Vancouver.” The opposite parties have filled in this Form 'Program of Study – Masters of Administrative Science (MAS). The opposite parties have placed on file copies of e-mails which shows that the complainant has been repeatedly asked to submit some documents but no conditional/offer letter of the university has been placed on file. On 17-4-2013 Vide Ex. OP-1/11 the office of opposite party No. 1 asked the opposite party No. 2 to send experience certificate of the complainant from 2011 till date. On 22-4-2013 vide Ex. OP-1/12, the opposite parties sent e-mail to the complainant vide which the opposite parties besides other documents demanded job certificate/work experience letter whereas the complainant after doing graduation wanted to take admission in post graduation. Thus, the whole record produced on file by the opposite parties proves that they tried to hide their own fault as they failed to get the complainant admitted in any university. Thus from the above, it is proved that the complainant from the very beginning has been requesting the opposite parties to process his case and to seek admission in post graduate degree as he was already having graduate degree. After doing graduate degree, no question arises for seeking admission in graduate diploma. As per version of the opposite parties, the case of the complainant for loan was rejected by the bank, so they asked the complainant to seek admission in masters degree, but they failed to get admission for the complainant in any of the above said universities/colleges. Moreover, as discussed above, no document has been produced on file by the opposite parties to show that the loan case of complainant was ever rejected by any bank. The opposite parties kept on collecting and getting signed the documents from the complainant including consent letters, but failed to get admission for him. Moreover, a perusal of consent letters Ex. OP-1/3 and OP-1/5 shows that name of the course has not been filled, which shows failure on the part of the opposite parties as they obtained general consent letters and not for specific course/degree. The another plea of the opposite parties that the complainant has failed to submit the requisite documents cannot be believed as it is a matter of common knowledge that at the time of processing any admission case of any applicant, all the documents are used to get deposited in advance and after verifying all the documents, the admission process is initiated. Keeping in view the facts, circumstances and the evidence placed on file by the parties, this Forum is of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as they failed to get admission for the complainant in any of the aforesaid universities in post-graduation degree despite receipt of necessary documents and aforementioned charges of Rs. 21,349/- vide Ex. C-2 & Ex. C-3, and due to this act of the opposite parties, the valuable time/period of about two years of the young boy has been wasted as he did not get admission in India also due to false commitment of the opposite parties. Although the loss of two years cannot be compensated with money, yet it would meet the ends of justice if this complaint is allowed with Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and cost which includes compensation on account of wastage of valuable time of the complainant. . In view of what has been discussed above, this complaint is accepted with Rs. 15,000/- as cost and compensation The opposite parties are directed to refund Rs. 21,349/- to the complainant. The compliance of this order be made by the opposite parties jointly and severally within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record. Pronounced in open Forum 11-10-2013 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President (Amarjeet Paul) Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur) Member | |
