<br /> COMPLAINT FILED: 31.10.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 23rd JANUARY 2009<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2337/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri.Harisingh,S/o Vijaya Singh,Aged about 34 years,No.86, Harish Home Appliance,8th Cross, Malleshwaram,Bangalore – 560003.Advocate – Sri.Vittala Shetty PV/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. The Secretary,The Country Club (India) Ltd.,No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main,Indiranagar, 1st Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.2) The Director,Amrutha Estates,No.478, Maha Padma,1st Main, 1st Stage, Indiranagar,Bangalore – 560038.Advocate – Sri.S.M.Manjunatha<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund Rs.1,25,000/- with interest and execute the registered deed with respect to the two complimentary sites and pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on an allegations of deficiency in service. Later on complainant got amended his complaint got deleted the prayer No.1 and 3 that is refund of Rs.1,25,000/- and a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- but restricted his claim with regard to handing over of the original gift deeds and refund of registration, stamp duty charges of Rs.35,000/-. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> Complainant being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP become the member of Mr. Cool Card the scheme floated by the OP and invested Rs.1,25,000/-. OP promised to allot two plots each measuring 1089 Sq. feet as complimentary and thereafter collected Rs.35,000/- towards the stamp duty and registration charges. With all that in spite of the repeated requests and demands made by the complainant OP failed to register the said plots and failed to extend the club facilities as promised. Hence complainant felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Though complainant invested his hard earned money he is unable to reap the fruits of his investment because of the hostile attitude of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to OP they are ready and ever ready to execute the deed with respect to the complimentary sites. In fact they executed the gift deed bearing registered document No.5379 and 5380 on 23.10.2008 in favour of the complainant. What ever the amount the complainant has paid towards the stamp duty and registration it was accordingly spent on the registration of the said documents. Under such circumstances they are not liable to refund the said amount now as claimed. Complaint is in fructuous. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the 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 this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has Proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of <br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <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. The fact that the complainant became the member of the OP scheme floated by the OP with regard to Mr. Cool Card is not at dispute. It is also not at dispute that OP promised to give two complimentary sites by way of gift each measuring 1089 Sq. feet. Now the grievance of the complainant is that though he invested his hard earned money in the year 2007 OP failed to provide the club facilities as promised and so also failed to execute the registered deed with respect to the said plots. OP collected Rs.35,000/- extra towards stamp duty and registration charges but still failed to perform its part of contract.<br /> <br /> 7. The fact that OP collected Rs.1,25,000/- membership fee and Rs.35,000/- towards the stamp duty and registration is not at dispute. OP admitted the said fact. With all that it failed to register the site in favour of the complainant as promised. Here we find the deficiency in service. As already observed by us complainant got amended his complaint and restricted his prayer only for handing over of the original gift deed. During the course of arguments OP produced one gift deed with respect to plot No.2 and submitted that another gift deed with respect to plot No.1 is sent to complainant through courier service. This fact is not denied by the complainant. So the purpose for which this complaint is filed and relief sought is fulfilled.<br /> <br /> 8. Of course complainant has sought for the refund of Rs.35,000/- collected towards the stamp duty, registration charges. Having taken note of the facts and circumstances of the case when the complainant got two plots free of cost by way of gift an immovable property of worth, the claim of refund of the said registration fees appears to be greedy. OP must have naturally spent certain amount and paid both known and hidden charges to the concerned authority while registering the gift deed. It is not known what is the actual expense that is incurred by the OP in execution of the said gift deed and registration of the same.<br /> <br /> 9. So bearing these facts in mind we find complainant is not entitled for the refund of the said stamp duty and registration charges of Rs.35,000/- as claimed in his amended complaint. As OP has made the complainant to approach with this Forum to redress his grievance that too for no fault of his justice will be met by directing the OP to pay some nominal litigation expenses. With these reasons we answer point No.1 & 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following: <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed. OP is directed to hand over the original gift deed with regard to plot No.1 & 2 along with connected documents and pay a litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.<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 23rd day of January 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Vln* <br /> <br /> <br />