Order No.  15  dt.  08/06/2017

          The fact of the case in brief is that the complainants received a call and sms on 18/12/2014 from o.p. 1 to receive some gift at Salt Lake City Centre, Block C, 3^rd Floor, Shop no. 303 on 19/12/2014. On 19/12/2014 complainant reached at the above place and the representative of o.p. 1 put forward several lucrative features. Those representatives assured that all their commitments would be reflected in the agreement and welcome letter issued by the o.p. 2. On good faith, complainants signed the agreement and gave Rs. 61,000/- in total of which Rs. 21,000/- by SBI card and Rs. 40,000/- by UCO bank card. After going through the agreement complainants found a lot of discrepancies from the commitment which was given verbally. On 10/01/2015 when complainants received the membership card etc. they found those commitment were missing. Immediately on 18/01/2015 complainants sent a letter to o.p. 2 seeking redress of their grievances along with a copy to o.p. 1. On 20/01/2015 complainants received a letter from o.p. 1 which stated that ‘no miscommitment from their sales representatives’. It was stated that they would have to pay balance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- in 9 EMIs @Rs. 11,000/- per month approximately starting after March, 2015 but in the welcome letter it was written that remaining amount would be paid within 45 days. Complainants were also told that only during the year of visit Rs. 8,5000/- had to be paid as maintenance fees. Later it was found that it was mandatory to give AMC every year. Complainants were assured that they would be provided 5 star, if not available, 3 star room with cooking facilities during vacations. But in the welcome letter it was stated that ‘studio type’ room without kitchen facility would be provided. O.p. 1 also offered the complainants free vacations in Dubai, Bangkok, Sri Lanka if they would pay Rs. 25,000/- or more on the date of meeting, i.e. on 19/012/2014 and opted for 30 years package but the complainants were of 73 and 68 years age opted for 10 years package. In spite of their request it was mentioned in the welcome letter that it would be 30 years package. Though in the Membership Purchase Agreement, names of both the complainants were mentioned but in the vacation agreement only the name of the complainant no. 1 was mentioned. Total membership fees was Rs. 1,61,000/- but in the welcome letter it showed Rs. 1,81,000/. Finding such misrepresentation complainants conveyed their grievances to both the o.p.s but in vain. Hence the application praying for return of Rs. 61,000/- with interest @10% p.a. along with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/-.

        O.p.s appeared before this Forum and contested the case by filing w/v. in their w/v o.p.s denied all material allegations inter alia stated that complainant entered into the agreement with the o.p.s after going through the terms and conditions of the agreement and duly put their signature and as such it is well-known by the complainant regarding the terms and conditions of the agreement in question. The agreement was signed by and between the parties on 19/12/2014 and non-performance of duty and obligation on the part of both of parties is a case of violation of the terms and conditions of the agreement. Complainant duly signed the said contract with their consent for a total purchase price of Rs. 1,61,000/- out of which only Rs. 61,000/- was paid and the balance amount was not paid by the complainants. Complainants did not make any attempts in order to avail of the benefits under country vacations membership plan. Complainants were aware of AMC mentioned in clause 9 of the said agreement. Though there is still outstanding due of Rs. 1,00,000/- o.p.s requested the complainant to avail of their services including the gift voucher issued to them.

        Complainant acknowledges and confronts that all the terms and conditions, rules and regulations, by-laws of CCIL shall be fully and completely binding on them on signing of this agreement. Complainant entered into this agreement at their free will and there was no compulsion or coercion or undue influence exercised by CCIL and / or its agents / representatives. The Ld. Lawyer for o.p.s argued that there is clear provision in the agreement that ‘the member is unconditionally given his irrevocably consent to purchase the membership of CCIL and 2^nd party understand that the membership fees is non-refundable under any circumstances and membership fees is not a deposit’.  

        The prayer for refund shall not arise at all and as regards the question of service the o.p.s are / were all along ready and /or unfair trade practice willing to provide the services to the complainant and as such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the o.p.s. Therefore the complainant is not entitled to get any relief and accordingly the case may be dismissed with exemplary cause.

Decisions with reasons :-

        We have gone through the pleadings of the parties and documents in particular. It is admitted fact that the complainant entered into an agreement with the o.p.s on 19/12/2014 and availed the holiday facilities from o.p.s upon payment of Rs. 61,000/- on 19/12/2014. O.p. 1 issued the receipt to that effect. It is also admitted fact that complainants received the Vacation Agreement and the Membership Card, Holiday Gift voucher. After going through the agreement complainants observed several discrepancies in the terms and conditions of the agreement. It was assured by the o.p. that the complainants would be provided with 5 star or 3 star room with cooking facilities. After going through the agreement as well as welcome letter complainants astonished that only studio type room without kitchen facility would be provided. Complainants were also assured that there would be an insurance coverage of Rs. 2.5 lakh for each during their vacations but no such document has been provided by o.p.s. Being childless couple complainants wanted to enjoy peaceful vacations at their old age. The representative of o.p. 1 by giving several false representation allured the aged complainants. Even when complainants express their grievances to o.p.s they did not bother to reply. At the time of presentation o.p.s allured the complainants that they would provide standard holiday package and to enjoy the same hassle free, complainants signed the agreement. At the time of argument complainants expressed that they wanted to enjoy the holiday package upon the representation of the o.p. 1. Everywhere they visit they cook their food themselves. When o.p.s assured them that they would provide the 5 star or 3 star rooms with cooking facilities they accepted their proposal happily but in the agreement complainants astonished after going through he agreements that how the representative of o.p. 1 gave them so much misrepresentation. Even in the welcome letter it was written that total price of the membership was Rs. 1,81,000/- though it was actually Rs. 1,61,000/-. Ld Lawyer for the o.p.s argued that it was typographical mistake. But this mistake was never conveyed to the complainants before filing the instant case.

        In view of above we find deficiency in service on the part of the o.p.s and as such complainants are entitled to get relief.

        As a result the complainant petition succeeds.

        Hence,

        ordered,

        that the case no. CC/154/2015 is allowed on contest with cost. The o.p.s are directed to refund Rs. 61,000/- (Rupees Sixty One Thousand) only to the complainants along with compensation of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only for causing harassment and mental agony and cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only within 30 days from the date 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.