SRI.D. KRISHNAPPA, PRESIDENT:<br /> <br /> Brief facts of the complaint filed by the complainant against the Ops are that he agreed to become a cool member of the Op2 club as per Op’s invitation since Op 1 is a sister concern of Op2. That he accordingly became a Cool member bearing no: KOOL704 by paying membership fee of Rs.75,000/- in single installment i.e on 6/12/2008. Op had issued receipts for the amounts he received. With that the Op had offered to allot a complimentary site measuring 1500 sq.ft at Serine Hills near Kodai foot hills, Kodai Kanak, Tamil Nadu. Complainant waited without utilizing any facility from the Op 2 club and he enquired about the registration of site. Op 1issued the allotment letter dated 20/1/2009 stating that the site no.771 near Kodai foot hills is allotted to the complainant and he has to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards documentation and registration charges to get the said site is registered in the name of the complainant . When he found all his attempts went futile and he learnt some bad attitudes of Op and fraudulent behavior of Op from his friend s and other cool card members, complainant lost his interest in Op’s offer and complainant find any fairness in the transaction of Op which was not Accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.25,000/- to the Ops through his credit card. On 24/1/2009 and 14/3/2009. But Op has not come forward to register the site as promised though the registration amount is collected from the complainant. Complainant approached personally to enquire about the registration of site, op prolonged the matter one or the other reason. But in the month of February 2010 complainant approached the Op’s officers behaved very badly and bluntly told to the complainant to do whatever he wants to do. With such a behavior of Op made the complainant to withdraw his membership and its amount. Hence, he approached this forum to seek relief from the Ops. Complainant is praying to grant him to refund Rs.1,00,000/- with interest @ 16% p.a and Rs.50,000/- as a compensation and other relief.<br /> <br /> 2. Ops have appeared through their advocate and filed version. Ops in their version have contended that the complaint is not maintainable and denied deficiency in their service. Ops have admitted that Op 1 is sister concern of Op2 and also admitted that the complainant has become a member of that club called cool membership bearing no.Kool704 under KOOL K scheme by paying membership fee of Rs.75,000/- which is non-refundable membership fee. It is further admitted that along with membership fee they have offered free site as complimentary to the membership taken and was gift to the members. That the complainant did not get the site registered though complimentary site bearing no: 771 at Serene Hills near Kodai foot hills has been allotted to complainant. in issuance of allotment letter dated 20/1/2009 stating that within 30 days from receipt of the letter the same registration can be done by the payment of Rs.25,000/-. But complainant not shown interest to register it and thereby have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint the complainant and ops have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant along with the complaint has produced the copies of the receipts for having paid towards membership fee, copy of allotment letter issued by OP, copy of bank statements which has paid through credit card. No documents are produced by the Ops. Counsels of both parties argued and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 4. On the above materials, following points for determination arise.<br /> <br /> 1. Whether the complainant proves that the Ops have caused deficiency in their service in not allotting a site?<br /> 2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?<br /> <br /> 5. Our findings are as under.<br /> <br /> Point No.1: In the affirmative<br /> Point No.2: See the Final order<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 6. Answer on Point No.1: As we have gone through the contention of both parties, there is no dispute between them, in this complainant having had become a member of cool card bearing no. KOOL704 by paying Rs.75,000/- as membership fee and that the Ops have offered a complementary site measuring 1500 sq. ft at Kodaikanal. As these facts are not disputed, the only disputes between the Parties remains for decision is regarding non-registration of a site as promised and the payment made towards registration of the site i.e 25,000/- is in dispute which is denied by Ops.<br /> <br /> 7. It is the grievance of the complainant that despite, he approaching the Ops several times Ops did not allot sites as promised. Complainant has asked in his prayer for refund of his membership fee on the ground that he cannot trust the Ops and do not wish to continue his relationship with them. But the Ops as stated above have not controverted the arguments of the counsel for the complainant and dissatisfaction he has expressed but Ops are still ready to register the site since already the site has been already allotted to the complainant. Ops contended that after the receipt of the said allotment letter, complainant did not pay the cost of Rs.25,000/- which he has to bear for the registration purpose. But complainant proved the registration amount has been paid to the Ops through credit card by producing copy of bank statements. According to the bank statement, complainant paid Rs.25,000/- in two installments. First payment of Rs.10,000/- on 24/1/2009 and second payment of Rs.15,000/- on 14/3/2009. These are the enough materials to prove that the payment for registration was already collected by Ops. Though, Ops received the amount towards registration, not able to register the site. It is not justifiable. <br /> <br /> 8. On considering all these facts placed before us, we find that there is nothing wrong in complainant asking for the relief of refund of membership fee because of non response or due to lack sincerity on the Op that we find there is no genuinity in allotment also.<br /> <br /> 9. If we carefully look at this offer, the offers in our view appears to be an uncertain and non-existing because it is not clear where exactly Op’s layout exists. In this way it is found that the Ops have offered such type of free plot to attract the people to become their members by paying heavy amount. Similarly the offers made in this case also exhibit uncertainty. It is found that the complainant became a member on 6/12/2008 by paying full amount. He has repeatedly stated the despite approaching the Ops they did not allot a plot. <br /> <br /> 10. Ops have neither register the site as assured nor refunded his amount though complainant requested. If the contention of the Ops that they offered to allot the site is located at Kodaikanal in Tamil Nadu, where exactly exists is really genuine. Ops have not even come forward to prove that they have formed any layout or sites at all leave alone execution of documents. Through the developments that have taken place in this case, we are of the view, the claim of the opponents do not inspire confidence in us and also in the complainant. Therefore under those circumstances complainant opted for taking back his membership fee which cannot be denied.<br /> <br /> 11. At the time of arguments counsel for complainant submitted that since form the beginning complainant only insisting to refund the paid amount without any other reliefs from the Ops. Even though, Ops did not come forward to settle the claim of the complainant only to harass the public by keeping their money. It was not denied by the Ops, means Op deliberately dragging the matters. It amounts to deficiency on the part of Ops and Ops are very negligent towards their customers, is indulging in unfair trade practice.<br /> <br /> 12. The Ops have contended as membership fee is not refundable. Without showing some progress in the formation of layout and registration of plot they cannot have no rights to retain complainant’s money. Hence, complaint in our view is entitled for the relief has prayed for. Therefore, from that date the complainant would become entitle for interest on the money to be refunded. With the result, we answer point No.1 in the affirmative and pass the following order.<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> Complaint is allowed.<br /> <br /> Ops are directed to refund Rs.75,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of deposit i.e from 06/12/2008 till it is repaid.<br /> <br /> Ops are directed to refund Rs.10,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of deposit i.e from 24/01/2009 till it is repaid.<br /> <br /> Ops are directed to refund Rs.15,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of deposit i.e from 14/03/2009 till it is repaid<br /> <br /> Ops shall refund above amounts within 45 days from the date of this order.<br /> <br /> Ops shall also pay cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.<br /> <br /> <br /> Dictated to the Stenographer. Got it transcribed and corrected. Pronounced in the Open forum on this the 6th September 2010.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br />