ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.912 of 2022 Date of institution : 27.10.2022 Reserved on : 21.02.2025 Date of decision : 18.03.2025 M/s Worldwide Global Law Offices Pvt. Ltd. (WWICS) through its Chairman/Managing Director/Principal Officer service through its Branch Office at SCO No.112, District Shopping Complex, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar.

…..Appellant/Opposite party Versus Lalit Kumar son of Sh. Datta Ram Mishra, Resident of House No.3773, Bagichi Mohan Singh, Ghee Mandi, Amritsar.

….Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 17.08.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Barnala (Camp Court at Amritsar) in RBT/CC/2018/240 Quorum:-

Sh. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Raman Walia, Advocate For respondent : Sh. Sumit Dua, Advocate KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party against the order dated 17.08.2022 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Barnala (Camp Court at Amritsar) (in short, the “District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite party (in short ‘OP’), under the Consumer Protection Act, was allowed while granting the following relief:-

“11. In view of the above discussion and law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission mentioned above, the present complaint is partly allowed and the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.36,300/- and Rs.5,000/- deposited by the complainant with the opposite party vide Ex.C-2 & Ex.C-3 along with interest @6% per annum from the date of deposit till realization. The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- on account of compensation and Rs.5,500/- on account of litigation expenses to the complainant .………..”

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission. 3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal, as alleged in the complaint, are that the complainant hired services of the OP for immigration purpose to CANADA and paid a sum of Rs.36,300/- and Rs.5000/- on 27.11.2017 to it. The OP assured the complainant that it would provide all the inputs required for the immigration of the complainant to CANADA. The OP further undertook to do all the paper work, to be submitted to the Canadian Embassy, on behalf of the complainant, as it was conversant with the rules and regulations of the Immigration. The complainant completed all the paper work and submitted the same through OP for immigration purposes. All the requirements, as and when called from the complainant, were promptly complied with to the satisfaction of the OP. Thereafter, the complainant visited the OP a number of times and inquired about the status of his application, but the OP was putting off the matter on one pretext or the other and assured that his case was under kind consideration of the Canadian Government and his immigration would be done within a span of six months. However, the application of the complainant was rejected on 24.01.2018, but on the website of the OP the status was shown as ‘application under process’. The OP has not performed its services as assured by it and failed to get immigration to Canada for the complainant. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Commission and sought directions against the OP to refund an amount of Rs.51,300/- and US $ 100 or equivalent amount in Indian currency along with interest @12% p.a. and further to pay Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation and adequate cost of litigation.

4. Upon notice OP appeared through counsel and filed written reply, wherein it raised certain preliminary objections, which are not required to be reproduced here for the sake of brevity. On merits,