NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
CONSUMER CASE NO. 1517 OF 2017
1. ASIF KHAN
S/o Advocate Altaf llahi Khan, age 38 years, Occupation: Self Employed,
R/o A15, 503, Bramha Avenue, Kondhwa,
PUNE
MAHARASHTRA-411048
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. TAURUS INFOTEK (MANOJ PALWE)
16/1, Siddharth Chambers, Behind Ranka Jewellers, Off Karve Road,
MAHARASHTRA-411004
...........Opp.Party(s)
BEFORE:
 
HON'BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA,PRESIDING MEMBER
FOR THE COMPLAINANT :
IN PERSON , ADVOCATE
FOR THE OPP. PARTY :
MR ANKUR GUPTA, ADVOCATE
Dated : 04 December 2023
ORDER
This consumer complaint has been filed under section 21 (a) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, ‘the Act’) alleging deficiency in service by the opposite party in not facilitating immigration services to Australia for which the complainant paid a consideration.
2. According to the complainant the brief facts of the case are that the complainant was a B Tech, MBA Degree holder and was also pursing law from Pune University. The complainant alleges that the opposite party was the owner of Taurus Infotech and was providing services of consultancy such as immigration by charging consultancy fees including taxes from candidates for services/ assistance for immigration including representation, interaction, communication, carrying out any transactions between the enrolled candidates and the concerned government/ immigration authorities. The opposite party by making claims of immigration services convinced the complainant to enrol for immigration for Australia. The opposite party also convinced the complainant about qualifying for the Australian immigration by doing the assessment. The complainant alleges that the opposite party had assured, promised and convinced the complainant that the entire process will take approximately 9 months from 9th March 2008 to December 2008 to complete the immigration process.
3. On 09.03.2008 complainant enrolled to apply through the opposite party for immigration to Australia and submitted the requisite documents and paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- through cheque as initial instalment to start the process of immigration. On 4th June 2008, the complainant received an assessment letter, competency demonstration report from the Engineers Australia which mentioned reference contract ID as 3434752 for all future communications and required the complainant to appear for IELTS Tests and to secure minimum 6 band in each module of listening, reading, writing and speaking. The complainant appeared for the IELTS Test on 26.07.2008 at Mumbai and secured overall score of 6.5 band and secured minimum 6 band in each module as prescribed by the assessment letter from Engineers Australia. The complainant states that he scored 7 in listening, 6 in reading, 6 in writing and 6.5 in speaking. The complainant also paid visa fees to the opposite party for the payment of visa fees. Complainant also paid Australian Dollars 2060 on 27.08.2008. The opposite party acknowledged the receipt of the amount and asked him to pay additional amount of Australian Dollars 45 which was paid in October 2008. Hence, the complainant has paid all the necessary payments for the immigration along with all the required documents to the opposite party. Complainant states that the Australian Immigration Department and Engineers Australia after verification of the degree/ assessment of qualifications of the complainant, categorised the complainant as ‘Engineering Technologist’ vide letter dated September 2008. The complainant submits the opposite party was to submit the fees, visa application and documents to the Australian authorities for further processing by the end of August 2008 or before 13.11.2008. However, the opposite party submitted the visa application and visa fees on 27.11.2008 after a delay of three months. On 27.11.2008, the complainant received an acknowledgement of receipt of visa application from the Australian Government, Department of Immigration and Citizenship. Complainant alleges that due to delayed filing of visa application by the opposite party by 15 days, there was a decrease in the overall score of the complainant. The complainant reminded the opposite party several times regarding submission of the documents immediately and before 13.11.2008 as the complainant was going to attain 30 years age as on 13.11.2008, since increase in the age decreases the related points for immigration to Australia. The complainant further alleges that the opposite party, due to delayed processing deprived the complainan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.