Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/358/2015

Pankaj Sood - Complainant(s)

Versus

Club Mahindra - Opp.Party(s)

Arnav Sood

11 Jul 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/358/2015
Date of Institution	:	05/06/2015
Date of Decision	:	11/07/2016

 

 

Pankaj Sood son of Sh. Krishan Gopal Sood resident of House No.4014, Whispering Garden, Sunny Enclave, Sector 125, Greater Mohali, District S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

Club Mahindra, Office No.504, Block-A, 5^th Floor, Elante Mall, Chandigarh through its authorised representative.

……Opposite Party

 

 

QUORUM:	DR. MANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                       

                                               

                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Sumer Singh Brar, Counsel for complainant
	:	Sh. J.S. Bhatia, Counsel for OP

                       

                 

PER DR. MANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

1.         Sh. Pankaj Sood, complainant has brought this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against Club Mahindra, Opposite Party (hereinafter called the OP) claiming compensation to the tune of Rs.18.00 lakhs on account of mental tension, agony and harassment suffered by the complainant because of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the OP besides litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.35,000/-.

                The facts, in brief, are that the complainant took the membership of Club Mahindra in the year 2010 on the assurance of the OP company for easy facilitation of family vacations etc. The complainant paid the membership charges to the tune of Rs.3.50 lakhs and besides that he was regularly paying Rs.12,000/- as annual maintenance charges.  The complainant planned a holiday with his family to Malaysia in the month of March 2015.  As per the terms of the Club Mahindra, the holiday package can be availed by two adults.  Accordingly the complainant alongwith his wife and two children as well as Sh. Sanjay Sood and his wife reached Malaysia and they were put up in Heritage Suites in Malaysia. As per the allegations of the complainant, the suite allotted to them was on the 18^th floor with only unmanned service lifts and even basic necessities like intercom in the room, internet access, local emergency numbers such as police, hospital and fire station were not there.  There was not even a security guard at the relevant time. The complainant alongwith his family stayed at Malaysia for three days and left on the fourth day for Singapore. Sh. Sanjay Sood and his wife were to leave for Indonesia later that day only. After the complainant had left with his family, Sh. Sanjay Sood late in the night felt certain uneasiness in his chest and collapsed.  In the absence of any emergency number the wife of Sh. Sanjay Sood had to go down 18 floors to get some help, but found no one at the security desk and no security guard was anywhere to be seen.  She was constrained to go out on the roads of an alien city at night to get help and found two outsiders who called the police and went with her to the 18^th floor to help her, but, by that time Sh. Sanjay Sood had died. It is alleged that no assistance was provided by the OP company during this grave crisis and personal loss.  It is further alleged that had basic facilities been provided in a proper manner, a life could have been saved.  Hence, this complaint.

2.         The OP controverted the assertions of the complainant, inter alia, taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable and the Forum has no jurisdiction to try the present complaint; the complaint is bad for non-joiner and mis-joinder of necessary parties as the resort has not been impleaded as a party; the complaint is totally baseless. The complainant was provided with free accommodation for two days on humane grounds as was felt to be extended in hours of need. The resort provided the facility for stay to enable the complainant make necessary legal arrangements to take the dead body and the complainant was further provided every possible help in the hour of need.  It is alleged that the complainant has not alleged any deficiency in service in as much as all the staff present on the unfortunate day of death of the guest of the complainant had provided all possible support and help. The staff had called the medical help as well as police.  It is pleaded that except for the bald, unsubstantiated statements in the entire complaint, there is not a single hint of any particular act or deficiency or negligence on the part of the OP.  The OP admitted the complainant to be having the membership of the club. It is alleged that the allegations are merely the creation of the complainant to extract money illegally from the OP.  It is pleaded that it is well known that any resort/suite at a place like Malaysia will have no such glaring defects as pointed out by the complainant such as internet, unmanned services, lifts, emergency number, security guard etc.  It is contended that the OP has no role to play in the death of Sh. Sanjay Sood which, as per the post mortem report, was due to heart attack and the same cannot be attributed to the OP by any stretch of imagination. It is alleged that the night shift security supervisor named Mr. Bisho personally handled the incident; he went to the unit after being called by his staff and acted immediately by calling the hospital’s ambulance and eventually the police. Denying all other averments of the complainant, the OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 
3.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4.         We have gone through the record, including the written arguments, and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the parties.
5.         The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the OP is deficient in services as it made the arrangement of the complainant and his guests in such a resort where the basic facilities of intercom, internet, security guard etc. were not available.  Even the emergency numbers of police, ambulance etc. were not displayed in the rooms. Non-availability of the emergency services resulted in death of Sh. Sanjay Sood who was the guest of the complainant. Had the proper facilities been provided, a valuable life could have been saved.
6.         On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP argued that in the Heritage Suites, Malaysia, every facility which is required in a hotel was provided. The allegation of the complainant that there was no intercom facility in the room, no internet and no security guard etc. are just creation of the mind of the complainant after the death of Sh. Sanjay Sood, who died due to heart attack.  He argued that immediately the ambulance alongwith doctor was called, but, when the doctor reached, Sh. Sanjay Sood had already died. Thus, the Heritage Suites, Malaysia staff provided all the facilities and assistance which were required to the wife of the deceased.  He argued that no complaint was made by the wife of the deceased with the hotel authorities or the local police at Malaysia with regard to non-availability of the facilities; even she did not complain that because of non-availability of the facilities, her husband expired. He argued that the complainant was not present at the time of death of the deceased, so he had no knowledge how and in what circumstances the deceased died. He further argued that the complainant himself stayed in the Heritage Suites, Malaysia, but, no complaint was made about the lack of any facilities.  As such, the complaint has been filed just to extract money from the OP. 
7.         It is an admitted fact that the complainant had the membership of Club Mahindra and he was authorized to accompany with him 2 guests for stay at the Heritage Suites, Malaysia which was arranged by the OP. The complainant himself pleaded that the complainant alongwith his wife, children and guests stayed at Heritage Suites, Malaysia for three days and left on the fourth day for Singapore whereas Sh. Sanjay Sood and his wife were to leave for Indonesia later that day.  Thus, when the incident took place, the complainant was not present there.  He had no personal knowledge about the manner of death of the deceased and how the wife of the deceased contacted the staff of Heritage Suites, Malaysia and sought help. The complainant in his complaint did not mention at what time Sh. Sanjay Sood felt uneasiness and collapsed and at what time he died or at what time the ambulance came. So, the complainant is not in a position to disclose as to whether the life of the deceased could have been saved by any mode or by any facility, or that deceased died there and then, or that the deceased was found dead by his wife when she woke up at night.
8.         No doubt, the complainant stayed in the Heritage Suites, Malaysia and he has also alleged that the basic necessities like intercom in the room, internet access, local emergency numbers such as police, hospital and fire station were not there, but, this version of the complainant cannot be believed because Heritage Suites, Malaysia was having more than 18 floors and it was a huge building.  Even if the complainant and his guests had to stay on the 18^th floor, the floors were interconnected and having lift facility.  Nowadays, the lifts are operated by the passengers themselves and no attendant is required.  The wife of the deceased could very well use the lift.  It is not believable that in such a huge building, no staff or security guards were provided.  The basic necessities like intercom, security guard etc. are provided even in small hotels where there are not more than five rooms.  The standard of the place where the complainant and his guests were made to stay was not so inferior so as to reach at the conclusion that the basic facilities, as alleged by the complainant, were not there.  Annexure C-7 is a copy of the printout from the internet which depicts the infrastructure of Heritage Suites, Malaysia. 
9.         The OP has placed on record a number of photographs showing intercom facility, adult swimming pool, children’s outdoor play area, common corridors, 3^rd lift, security personnel at the help desk at the ground floor lift lobby.  From all these photographs, it is proved that the place where the complainant and his guests were made to stay was having all the basic necessities as well as other entertainment facilities. It is not believable that such a place where swimming pool for adults and children and children’s outdoor play area has been provided and crores of rupees have been spent for the infrastructure, was not having the basic facilities of intercom etc. 
10.         The OP has also placed on record Annexure R-3, a copy of the security report, which proves that ambulance was called by the security guard. The ambulance came alongwith the doctor who after examination told that the deceased had already passed away.  The police was also called.  Ambulance number, police car No. and the name of the police officer are also mentioned in the report. So, it is proved that after the Heritage Suites, Malaysia management came to know about the incident, they immediately provided the help to the wife of the deceased, but, since the deceased had already died, so he could not be saved. Thus, it is proved that there was no negligence on the part of the Management of Heritage Suites, Malaysia.
11.         It is pertinent to mention here that during his 2-3 days stay at Heritage Suites, Malaysia, no complaint was made by the complainant regarding the lack of facilities or other amenities. No complaint was made even by the deceased Sh. Sanjay Sood or his wife during their stay.  So much so, the wife of the deceased, after the death of the deceased, made no complaint for lack of emergency services or other facilities to the Heritage Suites, Malaysia or the police.  There is not even a single document on record to suggest that the wife of the deceased was perturbed because of non-availability of the facilities or because of non-arrangement of the medical assistance by the staff of Heritage Suites, Malaysia. The wife of the deceased, in whose presence he died because of heart attack, was the best person to complain about non-availability of the facilities or deficiency in service by the Heritage Suites, Malaysia.  But, she neither made any complaint to anyone nor filed her affidavit in support of the allegations of the complainant. The complainant also did not make any complaint to anyone. The incident took place on 6.4.2015 and the complainant for the first time commented on the website on 22.5.2015 as under :-

“My Experience with Heritage Suites was Nice but would have been HAPPIER if the Rooms are connected with Basic Amenities like Intercom and Internet. I was bit disappointed with absence of these.”

12.         Had the Heritage Suites, Malaysia lacking all these facilities, the complainant must have made these comments immediately after leaving the hotel or after a day or two. These comments on the website have just been made to create evidence which is clearly an afterthought. The incident took place on 6.4.2015 and the present consumer complaint was filed on 5.6.2015 i.e. after around two months.
13.         Taking into consideration all the evidence on record, we have no hesitation to hold that there is no truth in the allegations of the complainant. The present consumer complaint has been filed just to get compensation as one of the guests of the complainant had died due to heart attack while staying at the Heritage Suites, Malaysia where the arrangement was made by the OP. 
14.         In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. As such, the consumer complaint is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
15.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
11/07/2016	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Dr. Manjit Singh]
hg	Member	Member	President