Date of Filing :06.03.2012

Date of Disposal :21.02.2022

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 21^st DAY OF FEBRAURY - 2022

PRESENT

Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mrs M.DIVYASHREE : LADY MEMBER

APPEAL NO.429, 430, 431of 2012

Country Club (India) ltd.,

No.273, Defence Colony,

HAL 2^nd Stage,

Rep. by its Asst. Administrative Manager

… Common Appellant in all these appeals

(By Advocates M/s.Sreenidhi Law Chambers)

J.S.Aravinda Kumar

No.578, Surabhi,

Judicial Layout,

GKVK Post,

Girish Kumar Krishna

No.161, 11^th Cross,

Yelahanka New Town,

Near Sharavathi Hotel,

No.161, 11^thcross,

Yelahanka New Town,

Near Sharavathi Hotel,

(Respondents in all these appeals are absentee parties)

COMMON ORDER IN APPEAL NO.429/2012

Mr.K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. These are the appeals filed U/s 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by OP/Appellant herein aggrieved by the impugned order dated 06.02.2012 passed by 2^ndAddl., District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bengaluru in C.C.Nos.1334, 1335, 1342/2011 respectively (For short District Forum and the parties as arrayed in consumer complaint).
2. The Commission below directed the OP/Appellant to return Rs.1,15,000/- to J.S.Aravinda Kumar and similar such amount also to Girish Kumar Krishna & G.Ramkumar who are none other Respondents herein, along with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till realisation and held in each of the cases are entitled for Rs.2,000/- towards cost of proceedings. It is this order is impugned by aggrieved OP on the ground that as per clause 15 of the terms & conditions only court of Sycunderabad and Hyderabad will have jurisdiction to resolve the dispute arising between the parties and the Commission below has failed to consider Sec.14 of CPA 1986 and has granted relief beyond its jurisdiction which is contrary to the facts and law is liable to be set aside.
3. We have examined the impugned order passed in these cases and read the grounds of appeal memo. Now, we have to examine, whether District Forum is justified to grant relief as granted in favour of the Complainant ?
4. If we examine the cause title, could see, OP/Appellant is represented by Addl., Administrative Manager and the address is shown as HAL 2^nd stage, Bengaluru. The Complainants are resident of Bengaluru city. In such circumstances, the contention that District Forum has exercised beyond the jurisdiction is not accepted by the Commission, since the Complainant and OP are residing within the jurisdiction of the District Forum and the cause of action is accrued within the jurisdiction of the District Forum. Therefore, clause 15 of the terms & conditions of only Sycunderabad and Hyderabad will have jurisdiction to resolve the dispute arising between the parties his held no relevance. Accordingly Commission rejected such contention raised by the OP/Appellant.
5. Let us come to examine the factual aspects of the matter. In this regard, it is not in dispute that Complainants are members of the OP club under the scheme Mr.Cool Card Members. In this regard, they have paid Rs.1,15,000/- each. The cool card members would get certain facilities they are:

• Country club cool life membership
• Complementary plot
• Holiday package of 2 nights 3 days stay in Bandipur, Bush betta
• Holiday package to RGBC Goa for 6 nights 7 days
• 3 days 2 nights in Country Club De-Goa with one way air ticket of couple and even food and pick up and drop is taken care
• Access to all the clubs in India and other facilities

6. It has come in the enquiry that, membership card issued in favour of the respective Complainants and as on the date of raising consumer complaint, are members of the OP. These complaints raised by the Complainants on the ground that the complementary plot was not allotted as promised. No doubt, under the scheme Mr.Cool Card the members are entitled for complementary plot. If we examined the appeal memo, could see, the OP/Appellant is already issued the allotment letter in favour of the Complainant allotting two complementary plots, pursuant to the said allotment, it was informed such members to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- towards registration and maintenance charges. In such circumstances, OP/Appellant cannot be said failed to provide service as promised to its members. It is not come in the enquiry that such members have deposited Rs.35,000/- pursuant to issuance of allotment letter in order to get such plot registered. It is therefore, we are of the view that District Forum has failed to consider these aspects of the matter. If Mr.Cool Card members availed some facilities extended by the OP club and if OP club failed to provide certain facilities, have to raise consumer complaint specifying such deficiency and not to seek non-refundable membership fee paid of Rs.1,15,000/- each. In this regard, it would be appropriate to rely on the order of Hon’ble National Commission dtd.22.05.2015 passed in RP/1191/2010 and other connected matters arising out of the order passed by this Commission, wherein held Complainants failed to pay the balance amount towards membership fee and therefore the Petitioner/Country Club was justified in forfeiting the initial deposit of Rs.20,000/-.Furtherdecision of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 2012(2) CPR 452 (NC) in the case of Country Club Ltd., &Anr vs. K.Dhamodhar, wherein held as State Commission has gone beyond its jurisdiction to grant refund of amount along with 18% interest. In A/2201/2011 along with connected matters of this Commission dtd.12.07.2012 allowed the appeals filed by the Country Club India Ltd., followed by the decision of Hon’ble National Commission are directly barring all points in dispute between the parties.
7. In 2012 (2) CPR 452 (NC) cited supra, it was also directed the Country Club Ltd., to execute the conveyance deed in respect of the plot in favour of the Complainant on payment of Rs.15,000/- by the Complainant. It is therefore, even in these cases, it is not only just and proper but legally to direct the OP/Appellant to execute the conveyance deed in respect of the plot allotted in favour of the Complainant on payment of Rs.35,000/- and to pay the miscellaneous expenses to be incurred to get the sale deed registered in respect of such plot.
8. In the above such conclusion, the Commission proceeds to allow the appeals. Consequently set aside the order dtd.06.02.2012 passed by District Forum. Accordingly appeals are allowed in part and directed the OP/Appellant to execute the registration of sale deed in respect of allotted plot subject to payment of Rs.35,000/- by the Complainants towards registration and maintenance charges and miscellaneous expenses to be incurred. This process is directed to be complete within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order. 
9. The amount in deposit is directed to be transfer to the Commission below for the needful.
10. Return the LCR to the District Commission.
11. Keep the original order in Appeal No.429/2012 and the copies in rest of the connected appeals.
12. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties.

Lady Member                          Judicial Member

*NS*