Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member.
- The complainants have brought the instant complaint under section 12 and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that complainants were approached by the officials of Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 that the complainant as the lucky winner out of a draw taken from 5000 candidates and that they had won a prize worth of Rs.25000/- and further sated that in order to collect the alleged prize the complainants have to visit the Opposite Party’s office at Trillium Mall, Amritsar and as such, accordingly, the complainants visited the office of Opposite Parties at Amritsar in the month of August, 2015 and when the complainants entered into the hall they were surprised to see 100 of couples who also won the first prize apart from complainants. The executives of Opposite Parties presented a rosy pictures of country vacations and the complainants brain washed to take a life membership in the country vacations for which he asked to pay a sum of Rs.1 lac instead of Rs.125000/-, if he is ready to take membership on the same day and that day was the last day to become the member of the same. The complainants were persuaded to take a hasty decision for being the members of their company by initially depositing a sum of Rs.1 lac on 3.8.2015 and Rs.90000/- paid on 12.8.2018 and on their repeated persuasions, the complainants were taken by their honey tongue and deposited the said amount with Opposite Parties and they were made to sign an agreement on 3.8.2015, the contents of which were never read over and explained to them and the officials of the Opposite Parties assured the complainants that they would get the requisite documents for enabling them to avail the vacations at different destinations at nominal rates. Although the Opposite Parties offered the facilities to the complainants at the Fitness Centre located at trillium Mall, Amritsar, yet the complainants flatly refused to avail the said facilities because the paucity of time with them. Hence the complainants made it clear to Opposite Party that they wanted to avail only the hotels/ accommodations for vacations period at different places and they would not pay any extra amount for the Fitness Centre or any other ancillary charges and it was only after having the concurrence and approval of the officials of Opposite Parties that the said amount of Rs.1 lac was deposited by the complainants with Opposite Party. The Opposite Parties procured he signatures of the complainants on agreement dated 3.8.2015 regarding the amount payable to the tune of Rs.1 lac only for availing the above said facilities. In the first week of October, 2016 the complainant No.2 requested the Opposite Parties through email for providing accommodation/ hotels at Goa during the period of winter vacations in the last week of December 2016 for the period w.e.f 25.10.2016 to 31.12.2016. In reply to the said email the Opposite Parties replied that the requested dates are sold out and they offered the accommodation before 20.12.2016 and accordingly to said offer of Opposite Parties, the complainant again sent email to the Opposite Parties for the booking of accommodation for the period 12.12.2016 to 17.12.2016, but the Opposite Parties intentionally not provided the reservation of accommodation on the said dates for the period of 6 nights and 7 days without any sufficient reason and rather offered the complainants for accommodation for the period of 4 nights and 5 days and further stated that if the complainants can confirm 4night/5 days on membership total 6 nights/ 7 days holidays will be use off which is against the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 3.8.2015. The complainants further requested the Opposite Parties for booking of accommodation at Mohali email dated 2.11.2016 and even reminder was sent to Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 through email, but no reply was ever given by the Opposite Parties. At the time of entering into agreement if was assured by the representative of Opposite Parties that they have a tie up with lumpsum club Amritsar and the complainants can enjoy the local club facilities, but when the complainants visited the said local club for enjoying such facilities, but the said authorities of club have refused to allow entrance of complainants in the said club. After refusal of Opposite Parties to accede to genuine and legitimate request of the complainant, the complainants demanded back the amount of Rs.1 lac with interest but the Opposite Parties remained putting off the matter on one pretext or the other. The complainant has prayed for following reliefs vide instant complaint:-
- Opposite parties be directed to refund an amount of Rs. 1 lac alongwith interest @ 18% per annum.
- Compensation of Rs. 50000/- may also be awarded ;
- Opposite parties be also directed to pay litigation expenses to the complainants.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties No.1 & 2 appeared and intended to file written version on behalf of Opposite Parties after lapse of 45 days from the date of service, but Opposite Parties were debarred from filing the written version after lapse of mandatory period of 45 days under the Act, though the written version are placed on record and the case was fixed for evidence of the complainant.
3. In his bid to prove the case Sh.Munish Kohli, Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
4. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file as well as written synopsis of arguments submitted by both the parties.
5. Ld.counsel for the complainant has reiterated the contents of the complaint and vehemently contended that the executives of Opposite Parties presented a rosy pictures of country vacations and the complainants brain washed to take a life membership in the country vacations for which he asked to pay a sum of Rs.1 lac instead of Rs.125000/-, if he is ready to take membership on the same day and that day was the last day to become the member of the same. The complainants were persuaded to take a hasty decision for being the members of their company by initially depositing a sum of Rs.1 lac on 3.8.2015 and Rs.90000/- paid on 12.8.2018 and on their repeated persuasions, the complainants were taken by their honey tongue and deposited the said amount with Opposite Parties and they were made to sign an agreement on 3.8.2015, the contents of which were never read over and explained to them and the officials of the Opposite Parties assured the complainants that they would get the requisite documents for enabling them to avail the vacations at different destinations at nominal rates. Although the Opposite Parties offered the facilities to the complainants at the Fitness Centre located at trillium Mall, Amritsar, yet the complainants flatly refused to avail the said facilities because the paucity of time with them. Hence the complainants made it clear to Opposite Party that they wanted to avail only the hotels/ accommodations for vacations period at different places and they would not pay any extra amount for the Fitness Centre or any other ancillary charges and it was only after having the concurrence and approval of the officials of Opposite Parties that the said amount of Rs.1 lac was deposited by the complainants with Opposite Party. The Opposite Parties procured he signatures of the complainants on agreement dated 3.8.2015 regarding the amount payable to the tune of Rs.1 lac only for availing the above said facilities. In the first week of October, 2016 the complainant No.2 requested the Opposite Parties through email for providing accommodation/ hotels at Goa during the period of winter vacations in the last week of December 2016 for the period w.e.f 25.10.2016 to 31.12.2016. In reply to the said email the Opposite Parties replied that the requested dates are sold out and they offered the accommodation before 20.12.2016 and accordingly to said offer of Opposite Parties, the complainant again sent email to the Opposite Parties for the booking of accommodation for the period 12.12.2016 to 17.12.2016, but the Opposite Parties intentionally not provided the reservation of accommodation on the said dates for the period of 6 nights and 7 days without any sufficient reason and rather offered the complainants for accommodation for the period of 4 nights and 5 days and further stated that if the complainants can confirm 4night/5 days on membership total 6 nights/ 7 days holidays will be use off which is against the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 3.8.2015. The complainants further requested the Opposite Parties for booking of accommodation at Mohali email dated 2.11.2016 and even reminder was sent to Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 through email, but no reply was ever given by the Opposite Parties. At the time of entering into agreement if was assured by the representative of Opposite Parties that they have a tie up with lumpsum club Amritsar and the complainants can enjoy the local club facilities, but when the complainants visited the said local club for enjoying such facilities, but the said authorities of club have refused to allow entrance of complainants in the said club. After refusal of Opposite Parties to accede to genuine and legitimate request of the complainant, the complainants demanded back the amount of Rs.1 lac with interest but the Opposite Parties remained putting off the matter on one pretext or the other.
6. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant on the ground that the main grievance of the complainants is that they were not provided holidays for the period 25th December, 2016 to 31.12.2016. A bare perusal of clause 23 under the vacations purchase agreement shows that these dates are blocked out dates. Hence, by acting under the terms and conditions of the agreement, Opposite Parties can not be said to be deficient in service. Moreover, said clause that all holidays are subject to availability as Opposite Parties follow a floating week. Further every effort is made to ensure transparent booking system and vacationers of high season get an opportunity to book first. 24 December to 3rd January are blocked out dates, RED week Booking can be done between 90 days to 15 days before the desired holiday dates, WHITE week booking can be between 75 days to 30 days before the desired holiday date and Blue week booking can be done between 60 days to 45 days before the date of the desired holiday dates. After the stipulated dates mentioned as per the season/ points, all CCHHL vacationers have an equal opportunity to book their holidays. Only after those CCHHL vacationer of middle or tower category can book his holidays. Moreover, there is no proof than a mere oral allegations that telephonic calls were made to complainants saying that they were lucky winner out of any draw and had won any prize and further that there were 100 of other couples there in the office of Opposite Parties, etc. It can not be believed upon a mere oral allegation of the complainants that hasty decision was taken by the complainants. It is to be noted that agreement is dated 3.8.2015 and payment is made on 12.8.2015 as admitted by the complainants himself in para No.2 of the complaint. Therefore, the complainants made the payment after 9 days of entering into agreement and after going through the terms and conditions of the agreement. The averments of the complainants that signatures of complainant on agreement were procured can not be believed. The emails communication made by the complainants was duly replied by the Opposite Parties. It was further contended that the agreement has been duly signed by the complainant at their own freewill. As such the complainant cannot wriggle out from the terms and conditions of the contract/agreement in dispute. Reliance in this connection has been placed upon “Grasim Industries Vs. M/s. Aggarwal Steel 2010(1) SCC 83 wherein it has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in our opinion when a person signed a document, there is a presumption, unless there is proof of force or fraud, that he has read the document properly and understood it and only then he has affixed his signatures thereon, otherwise no signatures on a document can ever be accepted.. There is no communication or evidence that the complainant ever raised any grievance in this regard.
7. On the basis of the aforesaid contentions, ld. Counsel for the opposite parties has vehemently contended that complainant has failed to make out a case for grant of reliefs claim vide instant complaint. Therefore, complaint being false and frivolous is liable to be dismissed with cost.
8. But, however, from the appreciation of the evidence on record, it becomes evident that the opposite parties are deficient in service. The contract agreement vide which the complainant obtained membership of the Country Club India Ltd, has been admitted by the opposite parties. It is also an admitted fact that the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 3.8.2015 for becoming the member of the club. It is also an admitted fact that complainant was entitled to holidays in India as well as Abroad for 6 nights 7 days in a year. After becoming a member of the opposite parties in the month of December, 2016, the complainant tried for reservation for accommodation at Goa at the local office through email, but the opposite parties No.1 & 2 failed to give any response for accommodation at Goa or for availing facility of gift vouchers . The complainants further requested for accommodation in the early dates of December, 2016 for Goa but their request was not entertained again and did not consider the request of the complainants and categorically stated that accommodation was not possible on the required dates. This shows that opposite parties are deficient in service. Facts of the case in hand attract to the ratio of law laid down in Harsharan Singh Versus Country Club India Limited & others decided on 1.4.2015 by the Hon’ble State Commission, Chandigarh, wherein it has been held that complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs. 80000/- which he paid to the opposite parties alongwith interest @ 9% per annum which would cater for compensation on account of harassment and mental agony, suffered by him because of deficiency in rendering service, on the part of the opposite parties.”. It was also held by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case titled “Country Club Versus Nirmal Kumar Pandey” vide order dated 22.4.2014 that consumer can seek compensation when club and resort membership turned out to be illusory. It is settled principle of law that in case, two plausible views were available, under given set of facts, the court shall be obliged to the view which was favourable to the consumer. Reference in this regard can be had to “Kulwinder Singh Versus LIC of India “ 2007(1) CLT 303 (Punjab) wherein it has been held that “where two views are possible, the one, which favour the consumer should be taken” .
9. On account of unfair trade practice being carried out by the opposite parties for not providing the facilities as agreed by opposite parties to the complainants, the complainants have suffered a great mental pain, agony, harassment at the hands of the opposite parties. Act & conduct of the opposite parties amounts to gross negligence, carelessness, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and the complainants are required to be compensated in accordance with law. In our considered view the complainants are entitled to refund of the total fee amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of order until full and final recovery. Cost of the litigation are assessed at Rs. 2000/-. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order ; failing which, complainants shall be entitled to get the order executed through the indulgence of this Forum. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated: 01.03.2017.
