R.VENKATA KRISHNAN Vs. TAANYA TOURS TRAVELS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 30th September 2009 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai ( 'the State Commission ') in First Appeal no. 682 of 2003. The facts of the case as per the petitioner/complainant are that the respondents/ opposite parties are engaged in the business of extending professional services to people in countries including India, Singapore etc., to migrate to other countries by securing for them visas and other employment opportunities. The petitioner states that he wished to migrate to Australia. Pursuant to this desire, in response to a newspaper advertisement, the petitioner applied for a family visa through respondent no. 2 first opposite party (Todd International Australia Pvt., Ltd.) through a letter dated 21.02.1994, the first opposite party rejected the application of the petitioner as he did not have enough points. However, the communication also stated that if the points were reduced, the petitioner would be informed through the agents of the first opposite party.

(2.) THE petitioner states that he later received a communication dated 15.07.1994 from the first opposite party stating that he met the points for migration to Australia. Pursuant to this letter on 01.08.1994, the consultants of the first opposite party advised the petitioner to contact respondent no. 1/ the second opposite party (Taanya Tours Travels) their local agent in Chennai and pay US $ 3000 in three instalments to get the visa to migrate to Australia. Subsequently, on 07.09.1994, the petitioner paid the first instalment of Rs.30,000/ - by demand draft in favour of the second opposite party. The petitioner received a communication dated 23.09.1994 about the services that would be provided by the first opposite party.

(3.) ON 11.01.1995 the petitioner made a third payment of US $ 600 being the third and final instalment by demand draft in favour of the first opposite party. The opposite parties acknowledged the receipt of the same vide their receipt bearing no. 0986 dated 24.01.1995. On 25.11.1995 visa fees amounting to Rs.9,577/ - was paid to the Australian High Commission, New Delhi by sending it along with all the original certificates relating to educational qualifications and experience of the petitioner. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner received a reply from the High Commission five months later, i.e., 21.04.1996 stating that his documents had been referred to the Australian Agencies for processing. Meanwhile, the petitioner received lucrative offers of employment in Singapore and New Zealand. However, as he was assured by the respondents that his migration to Australia was imminent the petitioner did not actively pursue the offers from Singapore and New Zealand.