DEVINDERJIT DHATT, J. - (1.)THE present appeal has been filed against the order dated 27.9.2005 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, U.T., Chandigarh in Complaint Case No. 385 of 2005. The contextual facts in brief are as under.
(2.)THE respondent/complainant hired the services of appellant/OP for migrating to New Zealand. As per agreement entered into between the parties brought on record vide Annexure C -1, the appellant was to help in providing the work permit/conditional visa to New Zealand for getting a job and help to score five additional points to enable him to qualify for immigration. In consideration of aforesaid services, the respondent/complainant paid Rs. 50,000 in cash vide receipt No. 213 for work visa application charges, Rs. 36,500 for immigration processing fee and Rs. 21,550 as immigration fee for visa application. These amounts were received by the appellant/OP and receipts of the same have been brought on record vide Annexures C -2, C -3 and C -4 respectively totalling to the payment of Rs. 1,07,600. The respondent/complainant has averred that as per agreement, the OP was entitled to an amount of Rs. 40,000 as professional charges after getting the visa for the complainant. Due to change in immigration policy of New Zealand Government for general skilled category, the application of the complainant (filed through OP) lapsed. The respondent has averred that the Immigration Amendment Act, 2003 required that New Zealand Immigration Services Authorities would refund the fee to the person in the event of lapse of his application but the appellant/OP failed to apply to New Zealand Immigration Services for the refund of amount paid by him. Since the appellant/OP did not get visa for the complainant as per the agreement entered into between them, it was not entitled to get the professional charges of Rs. 40,000. The appellant did not refund the amount of Rs. 1,07,600 paid to them by the complainant consequent to which the complaint was instituted in the Forum with a prayer to compensate him for the deficient services rendered to him by the OP and a direction for refund of amount of Rs. 1,07,600 with interest @ 12% and compensation of Rs. 10,000 for the harassment caused and Rs. 550 as costs of litigation.
Despite service, the appellant/OP refused to accept the summons and hence was proceeded against ex parte.

(3.)IN evidence the complainant i.e. Sh. Amandeep Singh filed his detailed affidavit along with Annexures C -1 to C -5.