Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/19/439

Sarita Verma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Genial Holiday Club - Opp.Party(s)

Karan Verma Adv.

16 Mar 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 439 dated 12.09.2019.                                                        Date of decision: 16.03.2022. 

 

Sarita Verma aged 53 years W/o. Sh. Rakesh Verma, resident of H. No.409/16, Near Books Market, Mohalla Ariayan, Khanna, Tehsil Khanna, Distt. Ludhiana, P.S. City-2, Khanna. Mobile No.98554-00186                                                                                                                               ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

Genial Holiday Club, SCO-118-119, Ist Floor, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chanidgarh-160008 through its Branch Manager.                                                                                                                                  …..Opposite party

 

Complaint Under Section 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection    Act, 1986.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. Karan Verma, Advocate.

For OP                           :         Exparte.

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the complainant is that the OP sent a message from its mobile on 31.10.2017 on the mobile of complainant’s husband stating that he being Hyundai car owner has been selected for free holiday at Genial Holiday Club for 3 nights/4 days at destinations Palampur, Dharamshala, Jaipur, Goa, Mountabu, Shimla, Nanital etc.  and the voucher be collected from Ludhiana branch. Thereafter, the OP sent another message on the mobile of complainant’s husband on 10.11.2017 which read as under:-

‘My dear Hyundai user, you have been selected in Genial Holiday Club “for 3N/4D day free holiday at Genial Holiday Club for Dharamshala, Jaipur, Goa, Agra, Shimla etc. Kindly collect your voucher from Ludhiana for more details call 8285006797’

Thereafter, complainant’s husband contacted the OP who called the complainant’s husband at Keys Hotel, Ludhiana. Complainant’s husband met the OP Branch Manager Sukhdeep Singh who conveyed to the complainant’s husband that they were providing holiday package for five year @ Rs.70,000/-. They would provide facilities of four to five star hotels for seven days and the customer can use only seven days facility in a year. If the customer does not visit for any trip of 7 days in a year, then those 7 days trip would be added in the next year and the customer can avail 14 days of holiday in the next year. The complainant’s husband paid a sum of Rs.67,500/- to the OP as subscription for five years package. The amount of Rs.56,000/- was paid through credit card and Rs.11,350/- through a cheque. The OP had promised that on payment of Rs.67,350/-, the OP would issue a membership certificate in complainant’s favour on the following address i.e. Sarita Verma W/o. Sh. Rakesh Verma, R/o.#409/16, Near Books Market, Mohalla Ariayan, Khanna-141401.

2.                It is further alleged in the complaint that using the membership certificate of the OP, complainant visited Manali (Himachal Pradesh) in the month of April 2019 with her husband and relative namely Naveen Kumar and his family at Amara Resort. Before going to Manali, complainant’s husband called Sukhdeep Singh, Branch Manager of the OP on 13.04.2019 at 1.43 PM and then again at 08.11 PM and again on 16.04.2019 at 10.38 am and 1.31 PM, but no response was given by Sukhdeep Singh to the said calls. The OP had provided only one room to the complainant and her husband. No separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym was provided to the complainant and her husband as promised. The complainant and her husband paid Rs.7500/- as maintenance charges to Amara Resorts. The family of Naveen Kumar also paid Rs.8,000/- for four days. When the complainant enquired about the actual rate of accommodation, the complainant and her husband were shocked to know that the actual rate of accommodation was just Rs.2,000/- per day. Moreover, the OP did not provide a separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym to the complainant and her husband during their stay. In this manner, the OP issued a misleading advertisement to trap the complainant’s husband to buying their membership. This amounts to deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the OP. A legal notice dated 15.07.2019 was got served through Sh. P.S. Bal, Advocate, Civil Courts, Khanna, but despite that the OP has not redressed the grievance of the complainant. In the end, it has been requested that the complaint be accepted and the OP be directed to refund Rs,67,500/- with interest @12% per annum.     

3.                Upon notice, the OP did not turn up and was proceeded against exparte.

4.                In exparte evidence, the complainant submitted her affidavit as Ex. CW1/A along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C8 and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through record carefully.

6.                In this case, the grievance of the complainant is that after obtaining membership from the OP on payment of Rs.67,500/-, the complainant visited Manali in April 2019 with her husband and relatives and they were made to stay at Amara Resort where they were provided only one room  for the complainant and her husband where no separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym were provided. They were made to pay a sum of Rs.7500/- as maintenance charges to Amara Resorts while Naveen Kumar was made to pay Rs.8000/- for 4 days, but on enquiry, the complainant came to know that the actual rate was just Rs.2,000/- per day. It appears from whatever has been stated in the complaint that the complainant and her husband stayed at Amara Resort for 4 days for which they paid Rs.8000/- but during their stay, they were not provided with any separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym. It has also been alleged that at the time of selling the membership, the OP had promised that four to five star hotel facilities would be provided to the complainant. However, to substantiate this part of the allegation, the complainant has not placed on record any document whereby the complainant might have been promised that they would be made to stay in five star hotels. Ex. C4 is the certificate of membership, but no detail is mentioned with regard to the entitlement of the complainant so far as the accommodation or rating of the hotels is concerned. On the back of the membership certificate Ex. C6, under the column of ‘Definitions’, it has been mentioned that the OP company was having various categories of resorts and hotels partners in India and would provide the timeshare owner week at various categories of apartments, with or without kitchenette facilities on time sharing basis. As per certificate Ex. C6, the complainant had opted for Blue (Holiday season), Apartment type Studio. However in the entire set of regulations/terms and conditions printed on the back of the membership certificate Ex. C6 there is no mention of  four or five stat hotel facilities. It is simply mentioned that the company would provide ‘1BR apartment’ which means fully furnished apartments consisting of one bedroom, one living room cum dining area  with kitchenette or without kitchenette and ‘studio’ means fully furnished apartment consisting of a bedroom cum living room with kitchenette or without kitchenette with entitlement of two adults. The complainant has alleged that they were not provided with a separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym. However, in terms and conditions printed on the back of Ex. C6, there is no mention that gym or swimming pool would be mandatory provided along with the accommodation. Even in respect of the kitchen facilities in terms and conditions, it is specifically mentioned that the apartment may be with kitchen or without kitchen. Therefore, from the terms and conditions placed on record by the complainant, it cannot be said that the OP was legally bound to provide separate kitchen, swimming pool or gym during the course of stay. Apart from that, the complainant has not proved the fact that usual rate of the Amara resort was lesser than charged by the OP. as no documentary evidence has been brought on file. In the given circumstances, it cannot be said to be said to be a case of deficiency of service on the part of the OP.

7.                As a result of above discussion, it is held that the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

8.                Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:16.03.2022.

Gobind Ram.

Sarita Verma Vs Genial Holiday Club                                      C/19/439

Present:       Sh. Karan Verma, Advocate for the complainant.

                    OP exparte.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:16.03.2022.

Gobind Ram.