Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/802/2017

Mrs, Kusum Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

Magic Holidays - Opp.Party(s)

K.C. Singla

17 May 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/802/2017
Date of Institution	:	14/07/2017
Date of Decision	:	17/05/2018

 

Kusum Jain wife of Sh. Harish C. Jain, resident of Arth Prakash Bhawan, Opposite to Tribune Colony, Sector 29-D, Chandigarh. 

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

[1]     Magic Holidays, Panoramic Group, through its Sales Manager Mr. Sandeep Pandit, SCO 65, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh.

 

[2]     Magic Holidays, Panoramic Group, through its Customer Relations Team, Khatau House, Basement, Plot No.401/411, Mogul Lane, Mahim (West), Mumbai – 400016.

…… Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	SH.RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

       

                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. K.C. Singla, Counsel for Complainant.
		None for Opposite Parties.

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, MEMBER

1.         Smt. Kusum Jain, Complainant has preferred this Consumer Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against M/s Magic Holidays and Another (hereinafter called the Opposite Parties), alleging that allured by the several attracting offers and commitments on purchase membership of Magic Holidays for a special discount price of Rs.2,15,000/-, the Complainant parted with a sum of Rs.19,350/- as down payment on 10.05.2017. Thereafter, having gone through the review of various consumers regarding Magic Holidays Scheme on internet, the Complainant changed her decision and requested the Opposite Parties vide telephonic calls dated 13.05.2017 and 15.05.2017 to cancel her membership and refund the deposited amount. When nothing positive could come out, the Complainant wrote a number of e-mails to the Opposite Parties (Annexure C-6 to C-9), but to no avail. Eventually, the Complainant got served a legal notice (Annexure C-11) upon the Opposite Parties to refund the disputed amount along with interest and compensation. However, no reply/ response received on behalf of the Opposite Parties. With the cup of woes brimming, the Complainant has filed the instant consumer complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 filed their joint written statement, inter alia, pleading that the Complainant jointly with her husband Mr. Harish C. Jain as nominee, had taken a 25 years Flexi Magic Regular White Studio Membership, costing Rs.2,15,000/-, but instead of paying the full membership, the Complainant opted to pay the membership fees in instalments and opted to pay monthly EMI plan of Rs.5,484/- in 48 months and paid only a down payment of Rs.19,350/- through credit card of HDFC Bank. It has been urged that all false allegations have been made by the Complainant to claim the amount, which she knows very well, is not payable to her as per the membership rules signed by her. As per the Membership Rules, no refund was due to the Complainant as the Complainant failed to submit her written request to the Opposite Parties within look in period of 10 days. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.         We have gone through the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant.
6.         Perusal of the e-mail Annexure C-5 annexed at Pg. No.31 of the paper-book reveals that the same was sent on 2^nd June to the Complainant by the Opposite Parties congratulating her for enrolling with them. Through the said e-mail, the Opposite Parties had also acknowledged the payment of Rs.21,500/- towards down payment of Complainant’s Magic Holidays Membership and assured her that she would receive her Membership Kit in 15 working days. On the same page i.e. Pg. No.31, one more e-mail dated 3^rd June is there, perusal of which shows that the Complainant communicated her dis-satisfaction on seeing the Plan/Scheme as sent by the Opposite Parties through the e-mail dated 2^nd June and requested for the refund of the earnest money at the earliest possible. Thereafter, through various e-mails, the Complainant followed up the matter of cancellation of her membership and refund of the down payment. Finally, the Opposite Parties taking the shelter of their terms and conditions through e-mail Annexure C-9, rejected the request of the Complainant. It is a matter of fact that Opposite Parties have charged an amount of Rs.19,500/- to provide services to the Complainant, but the Complainant has not availed any service, thus it will be unjust/illegal on the part of the Opposite Parties to forfeit the amount deposited by the Complainant. So far as the question of terms & conditions are concerned, they are unilateral in nature and hence can not be made applicable in the present case. As per Annexure C-5, on 2^nd June only the Opposite Parties generated the I.D. number of Complainant, and informed that she need to wait for 15 more days for receiving the membership kit. Meaning thereby, the Opposite Parties still had to perform part of their initial duty. Admittedly, on the very next day i.e. 3^rd June, the Complainant requested the Opposite Parties for cancellation of her membership, which as per Annexure C-2 falls within the look in period of 10 days as given by the Opposite Parties. Hence, the act of the Opposite Parties for non-adhering to the genuine request of the Complainant for the cancellation of the membership being unsatisfied and later non-replying to the legal notice and non-refunding the paid amount, proves deficiency in service on their part, which certainly has caused immense, mental and physical harassment to the complainant.
7.         In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite Parties are found deficient in giving proper service to the complainant and having indulged in unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Parties, and the same is partly allowed, qua them. The Opposite Parties are, jointly & severally, directed:-

[a]    To refund the amount of Rs.19,350/- paid by the Complainant along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of deposit, till realization

[b]     To pay Rs.2500/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and causing mental and physical harassment to the Complainant; 

[c]     To pay Rs.2500/- as cost of litigation;

8.         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amount mentioned in sub-para [a] above from the date of deposit, till it is paid. The compensation amount as per sub-para [b] above, shall carry interest @12% per annum from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as in sub-para [c]. 
9.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
17/05/2018	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
	Member	Member	President
“Dutt”