Punjab

StateCommission

A/11/854

Neeraj Kumar Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

WWICS - Opp.Party(s)

Amit Dhawan

17 Aug 2015

ORDER

                                                               FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH

 

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PUNJAB

          SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH

                                     

                   First Appeal No.854 of 2011

 

 

                                                          Date of Institution: 31.05.2011      

                                                          Date of Decision : 17.08.2015

 

Neeraj Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. J.C Sharma, r/o 124, Golden Avenue, Phase-1, Jalandhar.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    …..Appellant/Complainant

                                               

                                      Versus

 

1.       Wordlwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd., SCO 2415-16,        Sector 22-C, Chandigarh.

2.       Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Ltd., Defence Colony,    Jalandhar.

3.       M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy Corporation, 211     Defence Colony, Jalandhar City 144001 through its    Manager/Authorized Representative.

 

                                                         …… Respondents/Opposite Parties

 

First Appeal against order dated 16.03.2011 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kapurthala, Additional Bench at Jalandhar

Quorum:-

 

          Shri J. S. Klar, Presiding Judicial Member.

          Shri. Harcharan Singh Guram, Member

 

 

Present:-

 

          For the appellant              :         Sh.Mandeep Singh, Advocate  

          For the respondent          :         Sh. Raman Walia, Advocate     

 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

J.S KLAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER :-

         

          The appellant of this appeal (the complainant in the complaint) has directed this appeal against the respondents of this appeal (the opposite parties in the complaint), challenging order dated 16.03.2011 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Kapurthala, accepting the complaint of the complainant partly and awarding compensation of Rs.10,000/- for deficiency in service and Rs.2000/- as cost of litigation. The complainant now appellant preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation against the same.

2.      The complainant Neeraj Kumar Sharma has filed  the complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the OPs, on the averments that complainant entered into an agreement with OP No.1 and 2 on 29.11.2013 for doing all paper works, submissions of papers with Canadian High Commission and interaction with the Canadian High Commission to pursue the case of the complainant against amount of Rs.25,000/- The complainant availed Bronze Package, which consisted of immigration services only. On 30.12.2003, a sum of U.S Dollars 800 was paid by complainant to the OP No.3 on 30.12.2003, as per direction of OP No.2. On 5.04.2003, a sum of Rs.19,000/- in cash was paid to Canadian High Commission , as per the directions of OP No.2. On 12.06.2004, the complainant appeared in IELTS Test and was successful in the said test, as per the visa norms.  On 30.07.2014, the complainant paid a sum of U.S Dollars 80 to the OP No.2 for the assessment of academic qualification from World Education Services. The complainant got married on 20.10.2004. In the meantime, complainant asked the OPs to arrange for visa of his wife also. On 25.1.2005, as per the directions of the OPs, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.19,000/- with the OPs to arrange visa for his wife and submitted all the required documents to OP. The complainant contacted OP No.2 in second week of October 2008 and was informed that last date for receiving the documents by Canadian High Commission was on 07.10.2008 and document pertaining to complainants were forwarded to Canadian High Commission on 06.10.2008 only. The concerned person of OP No.2 even provided copy of e-mail to the complainant. The complainant again contacted OP No.2 for further progress in the third week of November 2008. The concerned person of OP No.2 told the complainant that due to some unavoidable reasons, the papers of the complainant could not be delivered to Canadian High Commission on 07.07.2008, which was the last date of submission of the papers. He further stated that due to that reason, the application of the complainant had been rejected by Canadian High Commission. The complainant was provided a photocopy of the rejection letter dated 10.11.2008. The OP by not sending the relevant documents to Canadian High Commission of the complainant before last date i.e. 07.07.08 committed deficiency in        service on its part. The career of the complainant was jeopardized therewith despite his appropriate qualification. The complainant has prayed for compensation of Rs.1,07,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum and Rs.8,00,000/- for mental harassment and Rs.22,000/- for cost of litigation.

3.      Upon notice, OP appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant. It was averred in the preliminary objections in the written reply that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. The case of the complainant was duly filed before Canadian High Commission and thereafter the Canadian High Commission asked for submitting of certain documents, vide letter dated 7.7.2008, which were to be submitted on or before 7.10.2008. The said documents were duly submitted on 6.10.2008 though OP, vide order dated 10.11.2008. The Canadian High Commission rejected the case of the complainant on the ground of non-submission of required documents. When enquiry was made later on, Canadian High Commission suo moto took up the case of the complainant and again rejected the case of the complainant on merits on 10.12.2008. The OP filed representation/review application before the Canadian High Commission on 21.03.2009 for reconsideration of the case. Application remained pending and complainant was aware of its pendency for reviewing the order. The complainant has misstated that his case was rejected, vide letter dated 10.11.2008 due to non-submission of the documents. The matter was pending before the Canadian High Commission and the sole interest of the complainant is to immigrate to Canada. Therefore, the matter needed to be adjourned sine die awaiting orders from Canadian High Commission. As per Clause 13 of the agreement dated 29.11.2013, the case is liable to be settled by the Sole Arbitration of the Chief Executive Officer of the Company at Chandigarh. The complainant has not impleaded M/s Global Strategic Business Consultancy Cooperation Sharjah UAE with whom the complainant had entered into an agreement and also deposited US $ 800 in favour of the said company. The complainant failed to provide the required documents within a reasonable time to OP, so as to enable the OP to forward the same to Canadian High Commission. In this regard, OP sent e-mail to complainant on 10.7.08 asking the complainant to send the documents in respect to new job. The complainant obtained certificate from Mayor World School on 09.09.2008 and obtained the Police Clearance Certificate on 26.09.2008 and dispatched these documents to OP, which were forwarded to Canadian High Commission on 6.10.2008, however the Visa Officer did not consider the documents and rather rejected the case of the complainant due to non-submission of the documents. The case was also contested by the OPs by denying any deficiency in service on their part and they prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

4.      The complainant tendered in evidence, the affidavit of complainant Neeraj Kumar Ex.C-A along with copies of the documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-15. As against it, OPs tendered in evidence the affidavit of Sh. Rajiv Bajaj Estate Officer of OPs Ex.R-A along with copies of the documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-11. On conclusion of evidence and arguments, the District Forum, Kapurthala, partly accepted the complainant of the complainant and awarded compensation of Rs.10,000/- to complainant for deficiency in service on the part of OPs and Rs.2,000/- as costs of litigation. Dissatisfied with the order of District Forum Kapurthala dated 16.03.2011 the complainant now appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation in this case.

5.      We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also examined the record of the case with the able assistance of counsel for the parties.  We have examined the pleadings of the parties on the record. The affidavit of complainant Neeraj Kumar on oath in support of his pleadings is Ex.C-A in this case. Ex.C-1 is attested copy of character certificate of complainant. Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-2/B are Contract of Engagement. Ex.C-3 is Degree of Master of Neeraj Kumar complainant. Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-5 are receipts no.5161 and 460336 on the record. Ex.C-6 is receipt no.1127763 for Rs.19,000/- by Canadian High Commission. Ex.C-8 is International English Language Testing System. Ex.C-9 is Credential Evaluation Report of the complainant on the record. Ex.C-10 is application for evaluation of foreign academic credentials invoice. Similarly, document Ex.C-11 is letter addressed to Canadian High Commission dated 19.08.2014. Other documents Ex.C-12 to Ex.C-15 on the record. On the other hand, affidavit of Rajiv Bajaj Estate Officer Worldwide Immigration Consultancy Services Limited Chandigarh Ex.R-1 is on the record. Ex.R-1 is letter from S.C Bailey Consellor / Counseiller Immigration. Ex.R-2 is letter from K.L Erickson First Secretary (Immigration) to complainant regarding refusing his application. Ex.R-5 is the Contract of Engagement on the record.

6.      From hearing respective submissions of counsel for the parties and from evaluation of the record of the case, the factual situation which emerged is that complainant availed services of OP No.1 and 2 and he also availed Bronze Package, which consisted of immigration services only. OP No.2 prepared the file of the complainant for presenting the same before Canadian High Commission and OP No.1 and 2 charged their fee from the complainant in this regard. The educational certificate of the complainant were got assessed from the independent agency and fee is to be paid by the complainant. The complainant was required to pass the International English Test Standard and fee was also paid to Canadian High Commission. OP No.1 and 2 submitted application of the complainant before Canadian High Commission and e-mail Ex.R-6 was sent to OP no.1 on 07.07.2008 pertaining to complainant. The requisite information was to be received within 90 days from the date of letter in the office of Canadian High Commission. The letter was forthwith sent to complainant on 08.07.08, vide Ex.R-7. Original letter was forwarded to complainant on 07.07.08. District Forum rightly recorded the observation that there is no crisp evidence on the record. The complainant submitted the documents, but those were definitely submitted or on before 6.10.08 and were forwarded to Canadian High Commission. There is no evidence of OP on the record that they forwarded the documents of the complainant to Canadian High Commission on 6.10.08.   The OPs relied upon document Ex.R-11 regarding submission of the documents of the complainant to quarter concerned on  6.10.08, but nowhere mentioned on the record that these documents were sent by hand or e-mail. We are in agreement with the findings of the District Forum that OP no.1 and 2 are deficient in service because they have not submitted the documents of the complainant forthwith and undoubtedly the case of the complainant was suo moto taken up for review but complainant demanded enhancement of compensation from OPs for  deficiency in service. Vide Ex.R-2 dated 10.12.08, the case of the complainant was refused by First Secretary 'immigration' of Canada High Commission. Papers of the complainant were considered by Canadian High Commission although in review the case was rejected. The OPs are deficient in service because they failed to inform the complainant to submit his papers well in advance from outed date of 4.10.08. District Forum awarded compensation of 10,000/- for deficiency in service  and Rs.2000/- as costs of litigation  to the complainant. We find that District Forum has awarded meager amount of compensation, which is required to be raised in this appeal. Consequently, we enhance the compensation to the complainant for deficient in service on the part of OPs, as they failed to inform the complainant to submit the application in advance before date i.e. 4.10.08, hence, compensation is raised to Rs.20,000/- and cost of litigation is also enhanced to Rs.5000/- from Rs.2000/-. Appeal of the appellant is, thus, accepted. for enhancement of compensation, as recorded above. The order of the District Forum is, thus, modified to this extent by enhancing  the amount of compensation to complainant to the extent of Rs.20,000/-, by enhancing cost of litigation payable to complainant to the extent of Rs.5,000/- .

7.      As a result of our above discussion, we accept the appeal of the appellant and, thus, enhance the amount of compensation to Rs.20,000/- and Rs.5000/- as costs of litigation.

8.      Arguments in this appeal were heard on 12.08.2015 and the order was reserved. Copies of the order be communicated to the parties as per rules.

9.      The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of court cases.

 

                                                                          (J. S. KLAR)

                                                             PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER

                       

                                                         

                                                          (HARCHARAN SINGH GURAM)

                                                                             MEMBER

 

August 17,  2015.                                                          

(ravi)