Indian Man Loses $15,000 in Illegal Immigration Contract Scandal

An Indian man, Ritik Sibbal, has lost a legal battle over a failed immigration deal in Canada, resulting in the forfeiture of his $15,000 payment to an immigration fixer. The Alberta Court of Justice ruled that Sibbal entered an “illegal contract” with Rajiv Chourhary Nathyal, who promised to help him secure a crucial letter of endorsement to extend his work permit. The court’s decision underscored the challenges faced by individuals navigating the complexities of immigration law.

Sibbal’s case, which was documented in a ruling on November 7, 2023, detailed his attempts to extend his work permit after it was set to expire in August 2024. Sibbal, who moved to Canada in April 2019 to attend business college in Vancouver, was motivated by a desire to secure permanent residency. He believed that obtaining a letter of endorsement from the City of Grande Prairie would allow him to continue working beyond the expiration of his post-graduate work permit.

In his testimony, Sibbal explained that he met Nathyal in early 2024 after being referred by an immigration lawyer. Nathyal proposed to assist him in obtaining the letter for a fee of $35,000, with Sibbal providing $15,000 up front. However, Nathyal never delivered on his promise, and the letter of endorsement was ultimately denied.

Despite his understanding that the agreement was illegal, Sibbal was desperate to secure his future in Canada. The judge noted that both parties entered the contract with awareness of its illegality, stating, “I find that Sibbal was a willing buyer and Nathyal was a willing seller.” Justice Susanne Stushnoff highlighted that both individuals were equally at fault in this case.

Sibbal’s hopes for permanent residency dwindled as his work permit expiration approached. Following multiple attempts to reach Nathyal for updates, he received news in late July 2024 that the endorsement had been refused. In a troubling turn, Nathyal suggested that Sibbal consider pursuing a “fake refugee case” as an alternative, a suggestion that Sibbal ultimately rejected after consulting with his family.

The judge emphasized the importance of upholding the integrity of Canada’s legal system, stating that claims stemming from illegal contracts undermine public policy. The court acknowledged the broader implications of such dealings, noting that they could threaten the integrity of the Canadian immigration system.

Nathyal was served with notice of the lawsuit but did not defend himself in court. Following the ruling, the court upheld its responsibility to prevent the enforcement of contracts that violate immigration legislation, highlighting that practices such as providing fake job offers are illegal and detrimental to the country’s immigration framework.

Sibbal’s experience serves as a cautionary tale for others navigating the complex immigration landscape in Canada. The court’s decision reinforces the necessity for individuals to engage with legitimate and transparent immigration processes to protect their rights and interests.