COMPLAINT FILED: 25.06.09<br /> DISPOSED ON:20.08.09<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 20TH AUGUST 2009<br /> <br /> PRESENT :- A.M.BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.1482/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Nishit Baliga,159/160, 11th Cross,Sri.Anantnagar Phase 1 Electronic City P.O.Bangalore – 560 100.Party in personV/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTY NO.1OPPOSITE PARTY NO.2 Highland Holiday Homes Pvt.Ltd,N0.47, Dickenson Road, Rear Wing, 5th Mezzanine Floor, Bangalore – 560 042Highland Holiday Homes Pvt.Ltd,Cisons Complex, 150, Montieth Road, 5th Floor Egmore, Chennai-08.<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund Rs.17,900/- with interest and pay compensation of Rs.75,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> 2. Complainant being lured away with the advertisement and publicity issued by the OP with regard to Holiday Vacation Package attended the meeting called upon by the OP on 21-06-2008. Though they are yet to make up their mind to avail the said package the executives of the OP rather forced them to sign some documents and took Rs.17,900/- out of Rs.34,900/- for the Holiday Vacation Package. When they returned home they checked about the credibility of OP on the internet and found that the OP business is not fair they have already cheated so many people. Hence, they immediately called upon the OP and requested them to refund whatever the money they have paid canceling their membership. Though complainant waited for more than one year there was no response from the OP. Thus complainant felt deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were sent to the OP. Though OP was duly served with the notice remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appear to be as bonafide and reasonable. Hence they are placed Ex-parte.<br /> <br /> 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 5. It is the case of the complainant that they being lured away with the publicity and advertisement given by the OP thought of attending the meeting called by the OP on 21-06-2008 with regard to Holiday Vacation Package. They were yet to make up their mind to avail or not to avail the said package, but still the executives of the OP practically forced them to accept package for Rs.34,900/- and took Rs.17,900/- through his HSBC Credit card, documents to that effect are produced.<br /> <br /> 6. It is further contended by the complainant that when they returned home they checked on the internet about the credibility of the OP. To their utter shock and surprise they found that OP has already fooled many more people under the similar scheme. Thus they felt that they are cheated. Hence, immediately they contacted the OP and requested to cancel their membership and refund the amount paid. There was no reply. Complainant personally approached the OP many more times and wrote 2 letters copies of the letters are produced. Again there was no response. Though complainant patiently waited for one year OP has not honoured for his demand. Hence he felt deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 7. The evidence of the complainant, which finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents, appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard the sworn testimony of the complainant. It is the quality of evidence that is more important than that of the quantity. The non-appearance of the OP even after the duly service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits all the allegation made by the complainant. Though complainant invested his hard earned money he is unable to reap up the fruits of his investment because of the hostile attitude of the OP. OP having retained the said huge amount without rendering the service accrued the wrongful gain to self thereby caused wrongful loss to the complainant. Under such circumstance complainant deserves certain relief. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following :<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part.<br /> <br /> OP is directed to refund Rs.17,900/- with 12 % interest from 21-06-2008 till realization and pay a litigation cost of Rs.500/-.<br /> <br /> This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication. <br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 20th day of August 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> nrs<br /> <br /> <br />