- Manoranjan Saha,
20 Maharaja Tagore Road,
P.S. Lake, Kolkata-31. _________ Complainant
____Versus____
- County Club (India) Ltd.
- Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road,
P.S. Park Street, Kolkata-16.
- Mr. Naquib Manzur DGM,
Manager / Authorized Person,
Country Club (India) Ltd.
63 Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road,
P.S. Park Street, Kolkata-16. ________ Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, Hon’ble President
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 19 Dated 17-12-2014.
The case of the complainant in short is that on 20.9.12 one of the representative of o.ps. came to complainant’s residence and explained the procedure and scope of transfer of membership from Ffort Holiday Club to Country Club (India) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as o.p. no.1). Being encouraged on the prospect of flexibility of the process available resources and quality services complainant agreed to their proposal and handed over the letter of authorization and made payment of Rs.65,000/- by his credit card. Accordingly, o.ps. issued the acceptance letter indicating the membership number as CCKK3CLUB5LB62418, the membership card and the temporary receipt of payment being reference no.091216-1363. O.ps. issued the acceptance letter dt.26.10.12 indicating membership fee as Rs.75,000/- and accepted Rs.55,000/- as membership fee allowing Rs.10,000/- as discount. Thereafter, o.ps. failed to transfer his membership from Ffort Holiday Club and made the complainant a new member of their organization. One of the membership cards issued by o.ps. was in the name of his wife who left the complainant for her heavenly abode almost a couple of decades ago. The matter was brought to their notice immediately for necessary rectification but o.ps. failed to take steps for necessary correction. Complainant experienced unexpected and unwarranted situation due to very poor maintenance and standard of service during his visit to the holiday resorts of o.p. no.1 at Kochin, Kovalam and Bangalore during 18.2.13 to 28.2.13. The digital Sony camera was badly drenched causing the camera inoperative and complainant faced trouble due to ceiling leakage on the rainy night of 18.2.13 in their Kochin resort. Due to loose glass panel door complainant was injured on 27.2.13 during his Bangalore visit in the resort of o.p. no.1. The services were too poor but complainant had to pay 50% more even as a member of the club than a non member. Complainant has informed o.ps. to transfer his Ffort Holiday Club for which he handed over the documents along with his new membership fee but in vain. Therefore, complainant filed the instant case praying for refund of membership fee, the cost of camera, refund of utility charges along with compensation and cost.
O.ps. have contested the case by filing w/v. In their w/v o.ps. have denied all the material allegations interalia stated that as there is no documentary evidence for transfer of the membership of the complainant so there is no deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. No facility is available with o.ps. to transfer the membership. Complainant has enjoyed the tour conducted by o.ps. and paid the utility charges as per the terms and conditions of the membership agreement and after returning from the tour complainant made a complaint against o.ps. As per terms and conditions of the membership agreement the membership fee is not refundable under any circumstances and the membership fee is not a deposit. So the case is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is admitted that o.ps. issued a membership card to complainant against the membership fees of Rs.65,000/- paid by complainant. Complainant informed his grievances about the tour conducted by o.ps. by his letter dt.26.3.13 but o.ps. did not pay any heed to that effect. Again complainant informed o.ps. by e-mail dt.16.11.12 but o.ps. did not send any satisfactory reply. Moreover, complainant had received a membership card in the name of his wife who has left her heavenly abode almost a couple of decades ago. It is very much negligent manner on the part of o.ps. as their unwarranted error badly hurt the sentiment of the complainant. After returning from the tour conducted by o.ps. complainant informed his grievances but o.ps. did not pay any heed. Whether the membership fee is returnable or not o.ps. did not reply to the complainant before institution of the instant case. So, there is deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. and as such, complainant is entitled to get relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only for deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. and harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only 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.
