Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/784/2019

Ms. Anu Dhingra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. Amit Saha s/o D.K. Saha (Manager) Country Vacations - Opp.Party(s)

Pankaj Chandgothia Adv.

01 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	784/2019
Date of Institution	:	20.08.2019
Date of Decision	:	01.02.2023

 

                     

            

 

Ms. Anu Dhingra w/o Brig. K.K. Dhingra, House No. 1044, Sector 21, Panchkula.

…Complainant

VERSUS

1. Mr. Amit Saha s/o D.K. Saha (Manager) COUNTRY VACATIONS, a division of M/s Country Club Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., SCO 44-45, 2^nd Floor, Sector 9 D, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh-160 009.

2. M/s Country Club Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Country Club Kool, 6-3-1219/A, Begumpet, Hyderabad, India, through its Director.

3. M/s Country Club Hospitality & Holidays Ltd., Regd. Office: Amrutha Castle, 5-9-16, Saifabad, Opp. Secretariat, Hyderabad-500 063, through its Managing Director.      

…. Opposite Parties.

 

BEFORE:
		SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
		SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Present:-
	Sh.Mohan Singh Ghuman, Counsel of complainant Sh.Pardeep Sharma, Counsel of OPs.

 

 

   

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1.     The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as amended up-to-date alleging therein that the executives of the OPs allured about the vacation clubs plans which included membership of many resorts in all over India and abroad, club facilities, SPA facilities etc. Being allured by the assurances, the complainant entered a vacation plan sale agreement on 15.04.2018 with the OPs and booked one vacation plan, which was valid for 10 years period on payment of Rs.1,49,000/- The complainant was issued membership card Blue Season (Annexure C-2).  The complainant kept on approaching the OPs to issue the membership letter, holiday plan and vacation plan so that the other plans and facilities could be utilized but they did not bother despite her repeated requests. As per Clause 8 of the agreement, the OPs were to give free accommodation vouchers for 2 nights 3 days at Dubai but no such voucher was given and as such the contract agreement becomes voidable and the complainant is entitled to refund of the deposited amount.  It has further been averred that Clause 17 of the agreement says that the member is entitled to a special concessional rate to book rooms at Dubai Hotel “during 2017”, however, the agreement was entered on 15.04.2018 and, therefore, the projected benefit is just a sham and an example of unfair trade practice. The complainant even tried to get a booking for a holiday in January, 2019 and made an online request through e-mail dated 15.01.2019 but she received no response from the OPs.  It has further been averred that the OPs-company devised the Holiday Plan Sale Agreements as a means to rob people of their hard earned money without intending to give anything in return. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint seeking directions to the OPs to refund of the membership fee along with interest, compensation for mental agony and physical harassment as well as litigation expenses etc.
2.     In their written version, the OPs while admitting the factual matrix of the case has stated that the agreement was entered by the complainant with free consent after going through the contents of the same and understanding all the clauses thereof and thereafter a welcome call  was given in which the OP-company confirmed her personal details, AMC information details and informed that the membership is non-refundable and is not a deposit and the complainant has raised no queries or objections whatsoever in nature during the entire call duration and confirmed the memberships with the OPs. Subsequently, the complainant was issued the welcome kit which included the membership cards, DAE card and welcome letter in which the details of the membership were again mentioned and also the welcome letter clearly states that the kit includes “vacation smart card (Blue Season) to which the complainant had no objection and no protest of any kind was raised after the receipt of the welcome kit. Therefore, there is no question of issue of any separate letter of membership.   It is denied that the complainant booked one vacation plan under any kind of allotment and kept on approaching the OPs to issue the membership letter and also to give her holiday package as assured and give her the vacation plan and sent the destinations as alleged. It has been stated as per clause 8 of the agreement, the OPs were to give additional vouchers for 2 nights and 3 days at Dubai which is to be used for the period from March to September and the said offer is valid for a period of one year from the date of registration of the agreement and the same is not extendable. But the complainant has failed to avail the said offer till September, 2018.  Moreover, the complainant has not disclosed the fact that the she opted to exchange the said benefit wherein she requested the company to issue the holiday at “Pattaya” location instead of ‘Dubai’ which as per clause 8 of the agreement was eligible for only members who opt for a membership which is valid for 30 years only. However, the OP as a goodwill gesture going beyond the terms of the agreement issue the same to the complainant and updated the same in the online account of the complainant.  It is also denied that the complainant was promised all the benefit of the platinum 30 years program even if she took only Gold 10 years program.  Moreover, the procedure to book holidays is online as mentioned in Clause 16 of the agreement.  It is stated that the reservation is only confirmed once the booking voucher is issue and the reservation merely with an e-mail for confirmation without a booking voucher is not a confirmed vacation and therefore, will not be accepted.  It has further been stated that “the charges is not refundable deposit and not an investment. The fee is not a refundable under any circumstances”. The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on their part, the OPs prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.     The parties filed their respective affidavits and documents in support of their case.
5.     We have heard the Counsel of the contesting parties  and have gone through the documents on record.
6.     Ld. counsel for the Complainant as well as ld. counsel for the Opposite Parties has mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in their written statements respectively. We have perused the rival contention of the ld. counsel for the parties. The ld. counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant entered a vacation plan sale agreement on 15.04.2018 with the OPs, which was valid for 10 years period on payment of Rs.1,49,000/- and she was issued membership card Blue Season by the OPs. A copy of the agreement was placed on record as Annexure C-1 and as such there is relationship of consumer and service provider between the parties. The contention of the complainant is that she kept on approaching the OPs to issue the membership letter, holiday plan and vacation plan so that the other plans and facilities could be utilized but OPs did not bother despite her repeated requests. The complainant even tried to get a booking for a holiday in January, 2019 and made an online request through e-mail dated 15.01.2019 but she received no response from the OPs.  The OPs-company devised the Holiday Plan Sale Agreements as a means to rob people of their hard earned money without intending to give anything in return.
7.     On the other hand, ld. counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld. counsel for the complainant and contended that in fact, the agreement was entered by the complainant with free consent after going through the contents of the same and understanding all the clauses thereof and thereafter a welcome call  was given in which the OP-company confirmed her personal details, AMC information details and informed that the membership is non-refundable and is not a deposit and the complainant has raised no queries or objections whatsoever in nature during the entire call duration and confirmed the membership with the OPs. The reservation is only confirmed once the booking voucher is issued and the reservation merely with an e-mail for confirmation without a booking voucher is not a confirmed vacation and therefore, will not be accepted.  It has further been argued that the charges are not refundable deposit and not an investment. The fee is not a refundable under any circumstances and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
8.     The contract agreement vide which the complainant obtained membership of the Country Club, is not disputed.  It is also an admitted fact that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,49,000/- as per the commitment as is evident from the copy of the agreement i.e. Annexure C-1. The said membership facility was for the complainant and thereafter, the complainant tried to get a booking for holiday in January 2019. She made an online request through e-mails to the OPs. But the OPs in its written version tried to escape their liability by simply stated that the booking can only be done through mobile app or through the given website but, in fact, the OPs did not give any response to the aforesaid email of the complainant and made any effort to get the booking done as proposed. As such the Opposite Parties have failed to provide the requisite facilities to the complainant despite taking the membership fee for valuable consideration. 
9.      Facts of the case in hand attract to the ratio of law laid down in Harsharan Singh Versus Country Club India Limited & others  decided on 1.4.2015  by the Hon’ble State Commission, Chandigarh, wherein it has been held that complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs. 80000/-  which he paid to the opposite parties alongwith interest @ 9% per annum which would cater for compensation on account of harassment and mental agony, suffered by him because of deficiency in rendering service, on the part of the opposite parties.”. 
10.          It was also held by the Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case titled “Country Club Versus Nirmal Kumar Pandey”  vide order dated 22.4.2014 that  consumer can seek compensation when club and resort membership turned out to be illusory.
11.     On account of unfair trade practice being carried out  by the opposite parties  for not providing  the facilities as agreed by opposite parties to the complainant, the complainant  has suffered  a great mental pain, agony,  harassment at the hands of the opposite parties. Act & conduct of the opposite parties amounts to gross- negligence, carelessness, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and the complainant is required to be compensated in accordance with law.
12.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint deserves to be partly allowed and the same is accordingly partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to:-

1. refund the amount of Rs.1,49,000/- along with  interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 20.08.2019 till its actual realization.  
2. pay Rs.7,000/- as compensation to the complainant on account of mental tension and harassment.
3. Pay Rs.7,000/- as litigation expenses.

13.      This order be complied with by the OPs jointly and severally, within 60 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission.
14.     Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced 01/02/2023
	Sd/- (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/- (B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER