Order No. 14 dt. 25/04/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that complainant was offered a membership for five years which included hotel accommodation for 6 nights 7 days including air fare hotel accommodation in abroad once in 5 years. The complainant after making several correspondences with the ops agreed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- for membership of the o.p.1 club. Accordingly the complainant paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- through a cheque dated 13.10.2012. The complainant was allotted for 5 years vacation to avail holidays for 6 nights 7 days and the room type was studio. The o.p. did not include foreign trip in the offer letter but while selling their product the o.p. committed to include foreign trip and the o.ps further demanded extra amount from the complainant in violation of their commitment. In view of the said fact the complainant being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the o.ps act and unfair practice the complainant had to pay Rs.50,000/-. On the basis of the said fact the complainant prayed for direction upon the o.ps for refund of the amount of Rs.50,000/- and compensation of Rs.40,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.9,000/-.
The o.ps filed w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainant entered into an agreement with the o.ps after going through the terms and conditions of the said agreement. The o.ps further stated that the complainant was never assured by the o.ps that they would provide foreign trip to the complainant with the annual membership charge of Rs.2,500/-. In order to avail of that facility the complainant ought to have paid Rs.6,500/- to the o.ps towards AMC. The agreement mentioned that the member is hereby unconditionally given their irrevocable consent to purchase the membership of the CCIL and the same is not refundable under any circumstances and is not a deposit. The o.ps never committed any deficiency in service towards the complainant and thereby the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant took the membership of the o.ps;
- Whether the complainant was not provided with the facilities as agreed b y the o.ps
- Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Decision with reasons:
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the o.ps misled the complainant and accepted a sum of Rs.50,000/- for providing some facilities but no such facilities were provided for which the complainant prayed for refund of the amount which was paid by him. The complainant further stated that the o.ps made false fact in the w/v that with the payment of AMC of Rs.2,500/- the complainant cannot expect any foreign trip facilities. The complainant was not provided with any facilities by the o.ps in spite of having the membership oif the club. The complainant after coming to know of the desire of the o.ps of their deceiving attitude asked for the refund of the amount but no such step was taken by the o.ps which compelled the complainant to file this case.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the question of refund of the money does not arise since the complainant himself after going through the terms and conditions of the membership accepted the same. The payment of the amount was not a deposit made by the complainant and the question of refund of the said amount does not and cannot arise at all. It is a surprising thing that how the complainant by paying an amount of Rs.2,500/- towards membership can claim for assurance given by o.ps to make arrangement for him to visit in abroad countries. In view of such fact the o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the o.ps allure various persons of providing facilities sometimes by offering voucher coupons, sometimes by giving assurance of providing accommodation at different places of interest, sometimes they assure the facilities of Gym, Spa, Swimming, Shopping Mall with the payment of subsidized rates for purchasing of goods, the subsidized air ticket if he purchases through o.ps and various other benefits are assured to the prospective members After taking huge amount from the respective members no facilities are provided on the contrary demand further amount for providing facilities to the members ultimately nothing will be provided to the members. There are so many allegations against the o.ps for which large number of cases are pending in this Forum and with the changing of jurisdiction the present cases are being filed in DCDRF Unit-II. The cases are generally filed by frustrated members and whenever the members asked for refund they are totally ignored by the o.ps. This case is another example of deceiving a member of the club after obtaining money from him to the tune of Rs.50,000/- he was ignored totally not to speak of any facility was provided to the complainant. The evidence on record establishes the fact that the amount was paid by the complainant to the o.ps but in return the o.ps failed to prove that any facility was provided to the complainant. The facts and circumstances of the case corroborated the fact that there was deficiency in service on the part of the o.ps., therefore we hold that the complainant will be entitled to get the relief.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered.
That the CC No.418/2014 is allowed on contest with cost. The o.ps are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs.15,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
