Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.

                                                                   Complaint No. : 555.

                                                                   Instituted on     : 27.11.2020

                                                                   Decided on       : 03.01.2024

Manisha (Age 30 yrs) w/o Manjeet resident of Shiv Nagar, BhiwaniChungi, Rohtak (Representative: Manoj s/oMahabirPrajapati, VPO Karor, Rohtak)

                                                                             ………..Complainant.

                                                Vs.

Manager, Global Tree Careers Pvt Ltd, 3rd Floor, G.Pulla Reddy Building, Above Axis Bank, BesideCM Camp Office, Begumpet, Hyderabad.

……….Opposite party.

COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.

BEFORE:  SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.

                   DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.

                   DR.VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER

Present:       Sh.Manoj A.R. of complainant in person.

                   Sh.SunilNandal Advocate for the opposite party.

                                      ORDER

NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:

1.                Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that  sheregistered for Canada Permanent Residence Visa through GLOBAL TREE CAREERS LTD with paying fee of Rs.70800/- on 18 Jul 2018. Their representative Mr.Sanjiv contacted the complainant and  made a lot of false promises that she will get Canada visa with 5 IELTS band also. They also told that they are having of legal ways to get Canada PR visa. They created the profile of complainant on Manitoba Province Immigration website i.e. Manitoba Province Nomination Programme (MPNP). Another Quebec province immigration portal was also startedby Canadian Govt., called Arrima Portal. Arrima Portal opened on 07 Sep 18 (for immigration to Quebec province) but they even did not know about that. Arima portal is an Immigration portal for Quebec province, it was opened with a virtual queue..On 19 Sep 18 representative of opposite party mailed the complainant  thatArrima Portal was on maintenance, but actually it was virtual queue for registration. The opposite parties were totally unprofessional and playing with  future of the people as they did not know about Arrima portal opened or maintenance or started.  On 21 Sep 18,she mailed them for refund as they were failed to create her profile for Canada visa.On 01 Oct 2018 complainant mailed them to help for resume writingbut opposite party never replied and never helped the complainant  for resume writing.. On 03 Sep 19, complainant raised complaint to opposite party about her Immigration case and asked for refund. But there was no response from opposite party.On 05 Sep 2019 to 26 Nov 2019 complainant sent messages to the opposite party to get her money back but they never replied. On 27 Nov 2019 complainant received a message from the opposite party that she was not eligible to get her refund with reason ‘Not ready to increase IELTS score’, and senta soft copy of an agreement in which they stated that Fee is non-refundable  and asked the complainant to give option either to expire theGlobal Tree Careers Pvt Ltd Profile without refund or continue with their services. Complainant opted to continue with their services.As the complainant opted to continue with their services, they never bothered to update her  MPNP and Arima profile, due to which on 11 Apr 20 the Quebec Immigration profile expired, on 29 Aug 20 MPNP Profile expired. Due to whichthe complainant lost chance to get Canada visa. Due to negligence on the part of opposite party, the future of the complainant spoiled and has suffered financial loss of Rs.70800/-. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite party may kindly be directed to refund Rs.70800/-  alongwith interest @ 24% and to pay  Rs.400000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment to the complainant.

2.                After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that entire relationship of the parties has been governed by the terms of the Service Agreement and no false promises have been made by the employees of M/s Global Tree. Further the collection of the entire fee is a common practice in the company and the industry as for the purposes of undertaking the services offered by the opposite party, the entire fee is required. The complainant approached the opposite party company in order to avail the facilities offered by the opposite party company in relation to applying for and obtaining a Permanent Resident visa in Canada. Upon having approached the opposite party company, the complainant was informed that the service offered by the opposite party company were only in relation to providing assistance in the process ofapplying for a Visa to Canada and Global Tree was not in any way responsible for grant of a Visa. All that was being provided was a consultancy service in relation to the application procedure for applying for the Visa. The complainant and the opposite party herein entered into an agreement dated 18.07 2018 whereby the complainant agreed to avail the consultancy services offered by the opposite party company upon payment of a sum of Rs.70,800/-. The opposite party company began the process for applying for the permanent resident visa of the complainant for the various provinces of Canada, and asked the complainant to share the details pertaining to the same such as educational qualifications.The status of the said visa process was repeatedly informed to the complainant. Complainant herein took the IELTS exam which was a mandatory requirement for the purposes of applying for the Canada PF Visa. However, despite having taken the said exam, the scores of the complainant were not very good. In view of the same, the opposite party informed the complainant that the chances of obtaining a Canada PR Visa with the said IELTS score was not very high. The complainant in fact acknowledged the same and stated that she would attempt the exam again.  In fact, when the complainant had sought to be  included in  another province's visa application program, the opposite party has acquiesced with the wishes of the complainant and has included the complainant in the same.Opposite Party has been following up on the applications submitted on behalf of the complainant and the only reason for the delay in the grant of visa and consideration for grant of visa is the low IELTS score of the complainant.It is further submitted that the only reason for delay in grant of visa is the low score of the complainant in the IELTS exam, no question of any refund being issued arises. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

3.                Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C14 and closed his evidence on 14.07.2021.  On   the other   hand, Ld. counsel for opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex. RW1/A, documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5  and closed his evidence on 09.05.2023.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.

5.                We have perused the documents placed on record by both the parties. In the present case it is not disputed that as per agreement Ex.R1dated 18.07.2018, opposite party has charged Rs.70800/- from the complainant for providing the services  ofCanada  Visa(PR +PNP).As per the copies of emails placed on record by the complainant, opposite party has submitted that the application of the complainant was under process and requested the complainant to wait for further updates from the Canada Government. As per the copy of email Ex.C8, complainant has submitted that : “As we paid a huge amount to Global Tree to get informed and make effort to show us correct path for getting PR, but its not like that. I informed my case manager about Arima project, even she don’t know itsopened or not. When I asked her that Arima is opened she sent me mail and said that site is on maintenance, the truth was that while logging in Arima project it’s a virtual waiting room and she said me that its on maintenance. It horrible, Next day she sent me mail that I am not eligible for Quebec immigration  as I must have Canada Express Entry profile for Arima, Now I successfully submitted my file in Arima website. I am totally surprised why I paid Rs.70800/- to Global Tree if I am not getting any update service from Global Tree, I want refund of my valuable money. I think it was my wrong decision to choose Global Tree for my Canada PR pathway. I don’t want to continue with Global Tree, Please Refund”.   The alleged email clearly shows that the staff of opposite party was totally unprofessional and they did not know that eitherArrima portal opened or maintenance or started.  The complainant herself successfully submitted her file in Arima website. As per copy of email Ex.C11, complainant repeatedly contacted the oppositeparty  but no response was received from their side upto 60 days.  No doubt, as per agreement Ex.R2, it is submitted that opposite party will not provide refund for the reasons, a) if you sign up the service & change your mind later and decide to withdraw, b) if you do not wish to continue with their services, c) if you fail to submit the required documents within 20 days of sign up. But in the present case, neither the complainant decided to withdraw, nor denied their services or failed to submit the documents. She only sought the refund of fee when the opposite party failed to fulfil their  promises. Hence from the documents placed on record by the complainant it is observed that there is deficiency in  service on the part of opposite party as no proper services were provided to the complainant, for which she had paid a huge amount. As such she is entitled for the refund of fee.

6.                In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.70800/-(Rupees seventy thousand and eight hundred only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 27.11.2020 till its realisation and shall also pay Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.

7.                Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

03.01.2023.

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

                                                          Nagender Singh Kadian, President

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

                                                          TriptiPannu, Member.

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

                                                          Vijender Singh, Member.