Order No. 10 dt. 27/03/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that he complainant in search of a better job approached the o.ps. in the year 2005 whereby the complainant was offered an application for immigration and permanent residence in Canada. After perusal of all the education qualification of the complainant the o.ps. demanded the amount and accordingly the complainant paid Rs.30,000/- on 29.8.05, Rs.20,000/- on 29.11.05 and he further paid Rs.19,000/- for visa fee and also paid US$ 1400 as professional fee. After waiting for some time the complainant did not get any information from o.ps. and thereafter in the year 2012 requested to o.p. to refund the entire amount at an early date. In spite of receiving the said letter o.ps. did not take any action. Finding no other alternative the complainant filed this case praying for refund of the amount deposited to o.ps. to the tune of Rs.50,000/- as well as US $ 1400 along with interest @ 12% and compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the o.ps. could not help the complainant because of change in immigration rules by the Canadian authority. The case of the complainant was duly prepared and filled in with the Canadian High Commission on 30.9.05 thus the o.ps. rendered all the services which the complainant was entitled to so as to get his case processed by the Canadian High Commission. The new Act introduced by Canadian Govt. known as jobs, growth and long terms prosperity Act which became a law on 29.6.12 under which all the applications that were made before 27.2.08 were terminated by the operation of law. The said fact was informed to the complainant. In view of the said fact o.ps. stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. Since the o.ps. rendered the service and the charges collected by o.ps. of Rs.50,000/- cannot be returned. The amount of Rs.19,000/- paid by the complainant towards visa processing fee was refunded to the complainant. The amount of US $ 1400 was paid by the complainant to M/s. GSBC, UAE which is separate legal entity and the complainant entered into an agreement with that agency for availing post landing services. In view of the facts and circumstances as stated above o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant provided the amount of Rs.50,000/- to o.ps.
- Whether the complainant got the opportunity as per the terms of the agreement.
- Whether the o.ps. committed any deficiency in service.
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that in order to get an employment in Canada and for getting better opportunity the complainant contacted the o.ps. The o.p. no.1 after considering the educational qualification of the complainant asked him to pay the amount of Rs.50,000/- and also US $ 1400 for making all sorts of arrangement for immigration of the complainant to Canada. The complainant as per assurance given by o.ps. provided all the necessary papers as well as fees to o.ps. But it is curious enough that in spite of payment of the amount in the year 2005 the complainant was not provided with any document viz. job assurance or visa by o.ps. The complainant thereafter made several contacts with o.ps. but no effective step was taken by o.ps. Ultimately the complainant demanded the amount which was also not answered by o.ps. Subsequently the complainant had to file this case.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the amount paid by the complainant was considered to be the service charge provided to the complainant which is not refundable. The complainant entered into an agreement with GSBC, UAE to whom he paid the amount of US $ 1400 which cannot be refunded by the o.ps. In order to get back the said amount the complainant ought to have made M/s GSBC UAE as a party to this case. Ld. lawyer for o.ps. emphasized that due to change of law enacted by Canadian Govt. which came into force on 29.6.12 and accordingly the applications which was made before 27.2.08 were terminated by the operation of law. In view of the facts and circumstances as stated above o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant made contact with o.ps. and as per the terms and conditions of the contract the complainant paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- to o.ps. The complainant also provided all the documents relating to his educational qualification. On being satisfied with the documents provided by the complainant the o.ps. asked for payment of the amount and accordingly the complainant paid the amount of Rs.50,000/- and it is also found from the materials on record that the amount was paid in the year 2005. The new Act came into operation in the year 2012 and the date of operation of the said Act came into force on 24.5.13 i.e. more than 8 years after the payment of the amount the said Act came into force. The complainant claimed that he was not informed regarding the fate of the application as well as payment made by him in the year 2005. After keeping silent for more than 8 years the o.ps. came with this plea that with the changing of laws the o.ps. cannot render any assistance to the complainant and o.ps. also denied to refund the amount which o.ps. claimed to be service charge. Here in this case, since no service was rendered to the complainant, therefore the claim of service charge does not arise and o.ps. cannot deny to refund the said amount. Because of such facts and circumstances of the case we hold that the o.ps. committed deficiency in service in refunding the amount of the complainant particularly the o.ps. failed to provide any assistance to the complainant for having a job in Canada. So far as the amount of US $ 1400 is concerned the said amount was paid to o.ps. and o.ps. in order to avoid the refund of the said US $ has taken this plea that the complainant ought to have made M/s GSBC, UAE as a party to this case for realization of the said amount. Since the o.ps. accepted the said dollar therefore it is the bounden duty of o.ps. to return the amount of Rs.50,000/- as well as US $ 1400 since there was gross deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.301/2015 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. The o.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to refund a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only as well as US $ 1400 to the complainant along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
