W.W.I.C.S. LTD. Vs. JAMSHED FAROOQUI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON account of not taking steps to process the case of the respondent with the Canadian visa authorities in spite of collecting professional fees and consultation charges of Rs. 30,000, the District Forum has vide impugned order dated 2nd April, 2007 held the appellant guilty for deficiency in service and directed it to refund the aforesaid amount and also pay Rs. 1 lac as compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation charges.

(2.) THROUGH this appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the appellant has assailed the impugned order firstly on the ground that the District Forum has not taken into consideration the relevant Clause 7 -C of refund of interest amount providing that refund will not be made in case there is a misrepresentation, fraud or criminal act or for Canadian national security reason or in case of failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement.

(3.) THE relevant facts pleaded by the respondent in favour of aforesaid finding of fact returned by the District Forum, in brief, are that vide Agreement dated 31.10.2001 the respondent retained the services of the appellant for the purpose of receiving professional services with respect of preparation and submission of his immigration case for Canadian permanent resident visa. In consideration of the retaining the services respondent paid Rs. 30,000 to the appellant, vide demand draft No. 293 dated 30.10.2001 drawn on Syndicate Bank towards consultancy fee and US $ 800 towards professional fee on 2.1.2002. Respondent's case is that although the appellant promised to submit his case with the Canadian visa authorities by the end of 2001 but as even during the year 2002 appellant failed to submit his case. Therefore, he took up the matter with the appellant. On this the appellant informed him that as due to certain changes to the immigration rules the knowledge of the French language had become necessary therefore respondent should learn the said language. On this the respondent got admission with Alliance Franchise at South Extension, New Delhi to learn French language and submitted necessary documents with the appellant. In spite of submission of the aforesaid documents appellant failed to submit his case even during the year 2003. Therefore he served legal notice upon appellant asking for refund of the professional fee as well as consultation fee. Although in reply appellant submitted admitted its fault yet as it failed to refund the aforesaid amount hence the respondent filed the instant complaint praying that the appellant should be directed to refund US $ 800 along with interest @ 16% p.a., consultation fee of Rs. 30,000 and Rs. 5 lacs towards compensation for mental agony, harassment and litigation charges.