AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
WE have heard the appellant who appeared in person and Ms. Tasneem Ahmadi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. We have also perused the records of the case including the order of the State Commission.
HAVING given our careful consideration to all aspects of the case presented before us by both sides we have come to the conclusion that the order of the State Commission does not call for any interference. Notwithstanding the persuasive plea advanced before us by the appellant requesting for enhancement of the compensation awarded to him by the State Commission for inconvenience and mental agony etc. We consider that the amount of Rs. 10,000/-awarded by the State Commission on the said count is quite adequate and reasonable. No enhancement of the said amount is, therefore, called for.
THOUGH on a consideration of the materials produced before us we are inclined to take the view that no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party has been made out in respect of the procuring of the visas to U.S.A. and Mexico we are not called upon to go in depth into the said aspect of the case inasmuch as no appeal has been preferred by Opposite Party and we have before us only the appeal filed by the Complainant praying enhancement of the compensation allowed to him by the State Commission.
IN our opinion the complainant has totally failed to make out any valid ground for enhancement of the aggregate amount of compensation of Rs. 22,000/- allowed to him by the State Commission.The appeal accordingly fails and it is dismissed. The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- by way of costs to the Respondent.