Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/462/2015

Sukhvinder kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Country Vacations - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

29 Oct 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	462 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	21.08.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	29.10.2015

 

 

 

 

 

Sukhvinder Kaur, Kulwinder Singh, H.No.17, Sukhram Colony, Behind Govt. College, Ropar 140001

 

             …..Complainant

Versus

 

Country Vacations Country Club (India) Pvt. Ltd., SCO 44-45, Sector 9, Chandigarh.

 

….. Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh.Kulwinder Singh, Authorised Agent                  for the complainant

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     Opposite Party exparte.  

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case of the complainant, he became member of the Opposite Party Club by making payment of Rs.1800/- as EMI facility bank charges and also entered into an agreement with the Opposite Party and further paid an amount of Rs.70,000/- through HDFC Credit Card on 25.8.2013.  It is averred that the representative of Opposite Party explained that the membership will entitle the complainant for free membership of the health club at any of their locations for life time which also include the children, and also agreed for payment through EMI for which they took Rs.1800/- as bank charges.  However, the payment invoice shows that the membership for the health club is valid for 3 months only. Moreover, the EMI facility was also denied by the bank through credit card.  As such, the complainant demand refund of the amount from the Opposite Party as the condition of life time free membership of health club is not getting fulfilled by issuing the membership card.  It is averred that after many time meeting, the complainant finally got a reply from Ms.Henna Salathia of Country Vacation on 15.2.2014 addressing to the bank that they agreed the charge back on Rs.60,000/-, which the complainant finally got on 3.4.2014.  However, the rest of the amount of Rs.11,800/- paid as part payment/EMI bank charges with the Opposite Party remained pending and after so many follow-ups, the Opposite Party failed to give any response and did not make the said payment. Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging the said act of the Opposite Party as deficiency in service.

 

2]       The Opposite Party did not turn up despite service, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 13.10.2015. 

3]       Complainant led evidence in support of his contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the authorised agent of the complainant and have also perused the record.

 

5]       The payment receipts placed on record by the complainant vide Page No.12, 13 & 14, evident that the complainant paid Rs.60,000/- by HDFC Bank credit card as part payment with invoice No.0813-FCVCDG-1071 dated 25.8.2013, Rs.10,000/- by HDFC Bank debit card as part payment with Invoice No.0813-FCVCDG-1073, dated 25.8.2013 and Rs.1800/- by HDFC Bank Debit Card as EMI charges paid to Country Vacations with Invoice No.0813-FCVCDF-1072 dated 25.8.2013, to the Opposite Party.  The record further shows that being not satisfied with the services of Opposite Party  and due to false assurances made by the Opposite Party qua non-eligibility for EMI, as confirmed by the Bank and also the assured free life time membership of Health Club for the entire family, was found to be valid for only next three months from the date of receipt, which was not acceptable to the complainant. The record further reveals that efforts made by the complainant for refund resulted in the repayment of Rs.60,000/- by the Opposite Party, as per procedure. 

         This fact has been admitted by the complainant in his complaint stating that:-

“After many time meeting Mr.Srimoy personally finally got a reply from Ms Henna Salathia of Country Vacation on 15 Feb 2014 addressing to the bank that they agreed the charge back on Rs.60000/-.

Even after this it took much time to get this resolved after so many calls to the bank and finally I got the charge back confirmation from the bank on email dated 03 June 2014.”

 

6]       Now the dispute in the present compliant is with regard to Rs.10,000/- and Rs.1800/- i.e. total Rs.11,800/-.

 

7]       The complainant claimed that an amount of Rs.11,800/- paid as part payment/EMI bank charges is still pending with the Country Club and after so many follow ups, they did not give any response and had continuously delayed the matter.  The complainant further claimed that he tried his level best to resolve the matter amicably with the Opposite Party, but they countered the claim of the complainant by offering some other packages for the money.  The complainant claims that only the refund of the amount along with interest as well as compensation and litigation charges to the tune of Rs.50,000/- is the only solution.  This averment of the complainant has been supported by the copy of the e-mail dated 17.62014 placed on record vide Page No.30, the relevant contents of the same are reproduced for the sake of convenience:-

         “Dear member,

As per our discussion, we already informed you that only 60000 will be refunded but 10000 will not be refunded as there is no refund policy.  You are getting your 60000 back due to charge back.

You are requested to visit our office we will try to give you best services against those 10000”

 

8]       Although the above said e-mail, refers only to the disputed amount of Rs.10,000/- only, but there is no record for the refund of the disputed amount of Rs.1800/-. So in our considered opinion, the Opposite Party is liable to re-pay/refund both the disputed amounts of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.1800/- respectively. 

 

9]       The Opposite Party though being duly served with notice, failed to put in appearance on 13.10.2015, thus raising presumption under Sub-clause (2) of Regulation 10 of The Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005, was proceeded exparte vide order dated 13.10.2015. The Opposite Party having failed to contest the claim of the complainant, therefore, all the averments of the complainant go unrebutted. The averments/ allegations of the complainant are also supported by duly sworn affidavit of the complainant.

 

10]      In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party is proved.    Therefore, the complaint stands exparte allowed and the Opposite Party is directed as under:-

a]  To refund Rs.11,800/- along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of payment i.e. 25.8.2013 till it is paid;

b]  To pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for causing him mental & physical harassment;

c]  To pay Rs.7000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite party within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which it shall be liable to pay interest @18% per annum, on the amount of Rs.11,800/- from the date of payment i.e. 25.8.2013 till it is paid, and also on the compensation amount of Rs.10,000/- from the date of filing of this complaint till it is paid, apart from paying litigation expenses.

 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

29^th October, 2015                                                                                                                                                         Sd/-  

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

Om                                                                                                                        

 

 

DISTRICT FORUM – II

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.462 OF 2015

PRESENT:   None   Dated the 29th day of October, 2015

O R D E R                        Vide our detailed order of even date, recorded separately, the complaint has been exparte allowed against Opposite Party.                    After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

 

(Priti Malhotra)	(Rajan Dewan)	(Jaswinder Singh Sidhu)
Member	President	Member