<br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL <br /> FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 22nd NOVEMBER 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT:- SRI.A.M.BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NOs.2104/2008, 2106/2008, 2115/2008, 2129/2008 & 2345/2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2104/2008COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.2106/2008COMPLAINANTSCOMPLAINT NO.2115/2008COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.2129/2008COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.2345/2008COMPLAINANTS Sri.K.Ramamurthy,Proprietor of M/s.Shruthi Industries,# 65, Nadakerappa Industrial Estate,Hegganahalli,Vishwaneedam Post,Bangalore – 560 091.Advocate – Sri.K.R.Nagendra Prasad1. Babu Selavaraj,No.24/9, 8th Cross, 2nd Block, Jayanagar, Near Ashoka Pillar,Bangalore – 560 011.2. Karthik Babu,No.24/9, 8th Cross, 2nd Block, Jayanagar, Near Ashoka Pillar,Bangalore – 560 011.Mr.Abhaya Dev,S/o M.Haridasan Namboothiri,Aged about 31 years,Flat No.B302,Ittina Akkala Apartments,Near Hoody Junction,Rajpalya,Bangalore – 560 048.(Advocate– Sri.Siji MalayilSri.Venkata Ramana,Motorola of India Private Ltd.,Baghmane Tech Park,No.66/1, Plot No.5,C.V.Ramannagar,Bangalore – 560 093.Sri.A.Chandrasekhran,772, 60 ft Road,BEML 5th Stage,Rajarajeswarinagar,Bangalore – 560098.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTY V/s1) M/s. The Country Club India Ltd.,# 273, 1st Main Road,Defence Colony, HAL 2nd Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.2) The Manager,Country Club (India) Limited,No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main,Indiranagar, 1st Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.3. The Chairman and Managing Director,Country Club (India) Ltd,No.12, Banjara Hills,Hyderabad.4. Amrutha EstatesNo.478, Maha Padma,1st Main, 1st Stage,Indiranagar,Bangalore – 560 038.Advocate – Sri.S.M.Manjunatha<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> These are the five complaints filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the respective complainants, seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to register a plot as promised or in the alternative refund whatever the amount that they have paid towards membership along with interest and pay some compensation on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> <br /> As the opposite parties in all the complaints are common, the question involved, relief claimed being the same, in the interest of justice, in order to avoid repetition of facts and multiciplity of reasoning, these cases stand disposed of by this common order.<br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaints, are as under:<br /> 2. Complainants being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP who promised to allot them a free and complimentary plot in the layout formed by them in addition to the club facilities thought of becoming the member of the OP Cool Card scheme and paid certain amount to OP and opted to get register the plots in their favour. The details of the card membership description, amount paid, date, plots promised to allot, date of issuance of notice are mentioned in a chart below for the sake of convenience.<br /> <br /> Sl No. Complaint No. Card Descript ion Amount paid Date Plots promi- sed Notice<br /> 1) 2104/08 Cool Privilege Rs.1,15,000/- 22.12.2006 3 13.08.08<br /> 2) 2106/08 Cool Privilege Rs.1,15,000/-Rs.1,15,000/- 19.02.2008 24.01.2007 1 1 07.08.08<br /> 3) 2115/08 Cool card member Rs.2,98,000/- Dec –2005 6 21.08.08<br /> 4) 2129/08 Cool Life Member Rs.1,60,000/- 10.01.2008 1 -<br /> 5) 2345/08 Cool Member ship Rs.1,25,000/- July 2007 3 ½ -<br /> <br /> That each one of these complainants invested their hard earned money unfortunately they are unable to reap the fruits of their investment. OP having retained the said huge amount accrued the wrongful gain to itself thereby caused wrongful loss to the complainant that too for no fault of theirs. The repeated requests and demands made by these complainants to OP to allot a plot and register a plot went in futile. OP on one or the other reason went on postponing the allotment of the plot. Thus complainants felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances they are advised to file these complaints and sought for the reliefs accordingly.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version. The defence set out by the OP in all these complaints are almost identical and same. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the version is as under:<br /> <br /> That the complainants have utilized all the club facilities to maximum extent. As per the terms and conditions they are required to pay the registration and stamp duty charges within 30 days from the date of allotment but complainants failed to pay the said charges. They have become the defaulters as such they have lost their right to claim the plot. It is further contended that OP is prepared to allot them the plot in some other layout which they have formed if complainants are ready and willing to pay the stamp duty and registration charges. Under such circumstances there is no deficiency in service of any kind on the part of the OP. The allegations made in the complaints are all false and frivolous. Among these grounds, OP prayed for dismissal of the complaints. <br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, each one of these complainants filed their affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in these complaints are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant’s have Proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of <br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant’s are <br /> entitled for the relief’s now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative<br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative in part<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. At the out set it is not at dispute that each one of these complainants have become the card member of the OP club in one or the other scheme like Cool Privilege, Cool Card, Cool Life Member, Cool Membership etc., and they having paid the amount on dates mentioned in the chart above. It is also not at dispute that OP promised to allot them the plots as a complimentary. Now the grievance of the complainants is that though they have paid entire amount pertaining to their card membership OP failed to allot a plot and register the plot in their favour. Thus they felt deficiency in service.<br /> 7. The evidence of each one of these complainants appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard their sworn testimony. It finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents. When once OP admits the membership of these complainants and received the amount mentioned in the chart it is an obligation on the part of the OP to keep up its promise in allotting the plot and register the plot. As against the unimpeachable evidence of the complainants the defence set out by the OP is that each one of these complainants are required to pay registration and stamp duty charges within 30 days from the date of allotment but they failed to pay the said charges. Unfortunately when OP allotted the said plots to the complainants is not known. No documents are produced.<br /> <br /> 8. It is contended by OP that the complainants have become the defaulters that is why the plots promised to them are already given to some other eligible members. For this basically there is no proof. Whether OP has completed the said layout consisting of the plots of various dimensions duly approved by the statutory authorities is not known. Of course OP has produced certain notifications and the layout plan. On the perusal of the said notification and layout plan it shows that the land belong to one M.N.Ningappa and he is permitted to convert the said agricultural land into non agricultural purpose. What is the relationship between M.N.Ningappa and OP is not known. Whether OP has purchased the said land from M.N.Ningappa or developed the said layout in a joint venture is also not known. The defence of the OP that they have completed the layout and it is ready for allotment does not find force.<br /> <br /> 9. On the perusal of the so called plan it does not mention the measurement of the each site and what is the total extent. As could be seen from the promise made by the OP they promised to allot sites at Coconut Grove to the extent of 3600 Sq. feet six plots each measuring 1800 Sq. feet to complainant in complaint No.2115/2008 and 3 ½ plots to the complainant Sri.Chandrasekhran in complaint No.2345/2008. So the defence set out by the OP appears to be defence for defence sake just an eye wash to save their skin out of sin.<br /> <br /> <br /> 10. It is much contended by the OP that complainant Sri.Abhaya Dev (in complaint No.2115/2008) has already transferred the membership in favour of his brother Sri.Amruth, hence he is not entitled for the relief. It is fairly stated by the complainant that he opted the membership not only for himself but also for his brother. There is no suppression of any material facts and the brother of the complainant is a beneficiary. Though OP promised to provide RCI facility, six lakhs insurance that promise is not kept up by OP in spite of complainant having caused several notice and made demand.<br /> <br /> 11. In complaint No.2345/2008 OP promised to allot him a site with a distance of 30 k.m or so but the site shown by the OP to the complainant is more than 110 kms and complainant is not agreeable for the same. We have closely assessed both oral and documentary evidence and we are satisfied that each one of these complainants are able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Complainants have enjoyed the club facilities to some extent that cannot be a reason to bar them from the present relief. It is the OP who promised to allot a complimentary plots to the member of their club. When OP failed to allot the said plot in time it will not only amounts to deficiency in service but also amounts to unfair trade practice. The intention of the OP in protracting to allot the plot appears to be not bonafide. <br /> <br /> 12. As already observed by us complainants for no fault of theirs were put to greater hardship and prejudice it is all because of the hostile attitude of O.P. When that is so they are entitled for the refund of the amount which they have paid. With these observations we answer point Nos.1 & 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaints are allowed.<br /> <br /> 1. In complaint No.2104/2008 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from January 2007 till realization and also pay a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.<br /> <br /> 2. In complaint No.2106/2008 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from March 2008 till realization and also pay a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.<br /> <br /> 3. In complaint No.2115/2008 OP is directed to refund Rs.2,98,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from January 2006 till realization and also pay a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.<br /> <br /> 4. In complaint No.2129/2008 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,60,000/- together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a from February 2008 till realization and also pay a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.<br /> <br /> 5. In complaint No.2345/2008 OP is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- with a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/-.<br /> <br /> This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.2104/2008 and a copy of it shall be placed in other respective files.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 22nd day of November 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Vln* <br /> <br />