<br /> Date of Filing:25.11.2009<br /> Date of Order:30.03.2010<br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 30th DAY OF MARCH 2010<br /> PRESENT<br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2234 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> D.K.Sar,<br /> S/o Sri Kapila Ch Sar<br /> Aged about 35 yrs,<br /> REVA Institute of Tech & Management<br /> College Campus,<br /> Kattigenahalli Jala Hobli, <br /> Helahanka(PO),<br /> Bangalore – 560 064.<br /> Complainant<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2380 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> Ramachandra S.Yaragal<br /> S/o Shri.Siddappa,<br /> Aged about 34 yrs,<br /> R/o No.30, Priyanka Bldg,<br /> 3rd Cross, Parappana Agrahara<br /> Electronic City Post,<br /> Bangalore – 560 010.<br /> Complainant<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2381 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> N.T.Ravuthappa,<br /> S/o Nagappa,<br /> Aged about 52 yrs,<br /> No.52, Shakti Garden<br /> Nagarabhavi, I Stage<br /> Moodalapalya,<br /> Bangalore – 560 072.<br /> Complainant<br /> COMPLAINT NO: 2769 OF 2009 <br /> <br /> 01. Maddipatla Rangaiah<br /> S/o M.Ramanna,<br /> A/a 54 yrs,<br /> <br /> 02. M.Savithri<br /> W/o Maddipatla Rangaiah,<br /> Aged about 48 yrs,<br /> <br /> Both Residing at #2,<br /> C/o Gokula Reddy Blinding,<br /> N.T.R.Layout, Marthahalli,<br /> Bangalore – 560 010.<br /> Complainants<br /> <br /> <br /> V/S<br /> COUNTRY CLUB(INDIA) LTD,,<br /> No.273, I Main Road, <br /> Defence Colony, Indiranagar,<br /> HAL II Stage, Bangalore – 560 038.<br /> (In Complaint No.2234, 2381, 2769/2009)<br /> <br /> COUNTRY VACATIONS<br /> A Division of Country Club(I) Ltd.,<br /> #55/1, Arthur Hobli,<br /> Deevrabeesanahalli, Sarjapur Road,<br /> Bangalore – 560 037<br /> Represented by its Chairman <br /> (In Complaint No.2769/2009)<br /> Opposite Parties <br /> <br /> -:COMMON ORDER:- <br /> <br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> These four complaints are clubbed together for passing common order since the opposite party in all these cases is one and the same and question of facts and law in all these four complaints are one and the same. Therefore these four complaints can be disposed off by passing common order.<br /> <br /> 2. These four complaints have filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 claiming refund of the amount paid to the Opposite Party towards membership fee of the club. The complainants have submitted that as per the promise and commitment, the Opposite Party has not allotted complimentary plots and sale deeds of the plots have not been executed in their favour. Therefore, the complainants submitted that they are not interested in continuing the membership with the Opposite Party club and they submitted that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency of service in not fulfilling the commitment and obligation as promised. Therefore, the respective complainants have requested that the Opposite Party will be directed to refund the amount paid by them with interest and compensation. <br /> 3. The Opposite Party filed defence version. In the defence version, the payment made by the respective complainants has been admitted. The Opposite Party submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, the Opposite Party could not allot complimentary plots in favour of the complainants. The respective complainants did not provide correct information about the complimentary plots. The Opposite Party submitted that even now also they are ready to allot and execute the complimentary plots in favour of the respective complainants if the respective complainants pay the stamp duty and registration fees. Therefore, the Opposite Parties submitted that they have not committed any deficiency of service. The Opposite Party also submitted in the version that the question of granting compensation and interest also does not arise <br /> 4. The respective complainants have filed documents. On behalf of the Opposite Party no documents are produced. Arguments are heard. <br /> 5. The points for consideration are:- <br /> <br /> 1) Whether the respective complainants are entitled for refund of the amount with interest?<br /> <br /> 2) Whether the Opposite Party has committed deficiency of service?<br /> <br /> 3) Whether the respective complainants are entitled to compensation for mental agony, etc.,?<br /> <br /> <br /> 6. My finds to the above points is as under:-<br /> Point No(1) : In the Affirmative<br /> Pont No(2i) : In the Affirmative<br /> Point No(3) : In the Negative<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> Point Nos. 1 to 3:- <br /> 7. I have gone through the pleadings and documents produced by the respective parties in support of their cases. The complainants have produced cash receipts issued by the Opposite Party to show that they have made payments to the Opposite Party towards membership of club. As regards the payment made by the respective complainants to Opposite Party, there is absolutely no dispute. The Opposite Party has fairly and rightly admitted the respective payments made by the complainants. Therefore we need not discuss much in respect of the amount paid by the complainant since it is admitted fact. The grievances of the complainants is that as per the brochure, commitment and obligation, the Opposite Party had promised them to allot and register a complimentary plot in their favour in view of taking membership of the club by the complainants. The complainants submitted that the Opposite Party has failed to honor the commitment and not allotted the complimentary plot in their favour. Therefore, the respective complainants submitted that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service. The complainants do not want to continue with the membership of the Opposite Party club, they are satisfied if their amount is refunded with interest. The Opposite Party in the version submitted that due to some unavoidable circumstances, the plots could not be allotted in time and the Opposite Party submitted that it is now ready and willing to register the complimentary plots to the complainants, if the complainants come forward to pay the stamp duty and registration charges. Therefore, it is the case of the Opposite Party that they have not committed any deficiency in service. It is true that the Opposite Party has taken defence in the defence version that even now also they are ready to allot and register the sale deed in respect of the complimentary plots. But mere taking defence in the defence version will not be a proper defence. The Opposite Party has not come forward with the details of plots availability and formation of layout. The Opposite Party has not produced any records to show that it has formed layout after getting all the required confirmation from the concerned authorities and layout has been formed and developed and plots are ready for allotment, etc. In the absence of any pleading and proof that the plots are ready to be allotted to the complainants, the mere defence taken in the defence version that even now the Opposite Party is ready to allot the plots and register the sale deed, cannot be believed or accepted. Under these circumstances, it is better, proper and fair to direct the Opposite Party to refund the amount to the respective complainants. Since the complainants do not want to continue the membership of club. So under these circumstances, it is just, fair and proper to allow the complaints and to direct the Opposite Party to refund the respective amounts received from the complainants. As regards interest is concerned, the complainants have claimed 18% Per Annum. This will be exorbitant and higher side rate of interest. Since, the Opposite Party had utilized the amount of the complainant for their benefit, it is just, fair and proper to grant interest on the respective payments. On the facts and circumstances of the case grating of interest at 8% Per Annum on the respective amounts paid by the complainant would be fair, just and reasonable. The complainants have claimed compensation in addition to the interest. This relief cannot be granted to the complainant. There is no question of granting any compensation to the complainant. Thus, the complainants are claiming refund of the amount paid by them and we have granted relief of refund with interest. Therefore, the question of granting any compensation in these cases does not arise at all. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> -:ORDER:-<br /> <br /> 1. The four complaints are ALLOWED.<br /> 2. The complainant D.K.Sar in C.C.No.2234/2009 is entitled for refund of Rs.1,45,000/- along with 8% interest from 29/06/2008 till payment/realization.<br /> 3. The complainant Ramachandra S.Yaragal in C.C.No.2380/2009 is entitled for refund of Rs.1,15,000/- along with 8% interest from 28/12/2006 till payment/realization.<br /> 4. The complainant N.T.Ravuthappa in C.C.No.2381/2009 is entitled for refund of Rs.1,15,000/- along with 8% interest from 29/12/2006 till payment/realization.<br /> 5. The complainant Maddipatla Rangaiah in C.C.No.2769/2009 is entitled for refund of Rs.90,000/- along with 8% interest from 31/03/2009 till payment/realization.<br /> 6. The respective complainants are entitled for Rs.1,000/- as costs of the present proceedings from the Opposite Party.<br /> 7. The Opposite Party is directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order.<br /> 8. The Opposite Party is further directed to send the amount to respective complainants as per the order directly with intimation to this Forum.<br /> 9. Keep the copy of the order in connected cases i.e., 2380/2009, 2381/2009 and 2769/2009. <br /> 10. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30th DAY OF MARCH 2010. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br />