Consumer Forum Orders Ameerpet Consultancy to Pay ₹1.10 Lakh to Dilsukhnagar Resident

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I in Hyderabad has ordered Hash Overseas, an immigration consultancy based in Ameerpet, to pay ₹1.10 lakh in compensation and ₹15,000 in litigation costs to a Dilsukhnagar resident for deficiency in service and unfair trade practices regarding his overseas visa application.

In its August 3 order, the consumer forum held the consultancy liable after a complaint was filed by Naveen Kumar Muchintala, a private employee. Muchintala alleged that the firm failed to fulfil its promise of converting a visitor visa into a work permit within 90 days, despite collecting service charges.

According to the complaint, Muchintala originally approached the Ameerpet consultancy for a Canada visit-to-work visa conversion. He paid ₹50,000 in service fees and ₹10,911 in immigration charges, while also borrowing ₹10 lakh to maintain the bank balance required for the process, incurring monthly interest expenses.

Muchintala stated that his Canada visa application was rejected due to an incorrect filing by an employee of the consultancy. Following the rejection, an Australian visitor visa was obtained, but the promised conversion into an Australian work permit was never completed.

In its defence, Hash Overseas denied any deficiency in service, arguing that work visa approvals depend on employers and that changes in Australian government policy had affected the conversion process. The firm claimed that Muchintala voluntarily switched his preference to Australia and that his qualifications did not match the job requirements.

The consultancy further argued that Muchintala had paid only for processing the visitor visa and not separately for the work permit conversion, asserting that the conversion service was free and outside the commission's jurisdiction. The commission noted that in a reply notice dated December 23, 2024, the consultancy had offered to refund ₹50,000, which Muchintala declined to accept.

The commission observed that the rejection of the initial Canada application due to an error by the consultancy was undisputed. It held that providing a visitor visa without the promised work permit conversion rendered the entire exercise futile and defeated the intention of the contract.

Allowing the complaint in part, the commission directed Hash Overseas to pay the compensation and litigation expenses within 45 days. In case of default, the compensation amount will carry interest at 6 percent per annum from the date of filing of the complaint until payment.