(Per Shri P.N.Kashalkar, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)
(1) This is an appeal filed by the original opponent against the order dated 21/11/2005 passed by District Forum Pune in Consumer Complaint No.142/2000. Today, both the parties are absent. This appeal has been lying unattended. The appellant had not bothered to enquire with the office. As per the policy of the Commission, this matter was placed before us for disposal on 20/09/2011. Intimation of that date was displayed on notice board and published on internet board of the Commission. On 20/09/2011, on finding that appellant as well as the respondent was absent, we directed office to issue notice informing next date of hearing i.e. 05/12/2011 to both the parties. Accordingly, on 03/11/2011, office issued notices to the parties. On 05/12/2011 i.e. today, the appellant as well as the respondent are absent. Therefore, we propose to dispose off the appeal on merit.
(2) We perused the impugned order. The complainant had applied for allotment of a Time Share on 25/07/1995 with opponent No.1 and as per allotment letter dated 22/08/1995 forwarded Time Share Agreement duly executed between the complainant and opponent No.1 on 11/09/2005 for Mahabaleshwar Regular Apartment. As per terms & conditions of the agreement, the Time Share was to commence from Week No.1, beginning at 06.00 a.m. on 06/01/1997 and ending on 08.00 p.m. on 12/01/1997 and that the total Time Share agreed to be provided was for complainants, in the month of December 1996. According to the complainant, they enquired with the branch office of the opponent No.1 at Pune regarding the status of the holiday resort at Mahabaleshwar, but the complainants were told that the resort was not ready for occupation at Mahabaleshwar. Again the complainant wrote five letters in 1999 and on 20/01/2000 to the opponent No.1 to confirm the status of the proposed resort. But there was no response and therefore the complainant filed consumer complaint and alleged deficiency in service on the part of the opponent No.1 and prayed that the opponents should be directed to refund an amount of `1,89,929/-, which included in it an amount of `78,000/- and an amount 61,929/- on account of interest @ 18% p.a. + an amount of 50,000/- towards damages for mental harassment.
(3) Opponent No.1 filed written version and affidavit of Rakesh Kumar, Zonal Manager and raised contention that the forum below has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint. According to the opponent No.1, only Civil Court has a jurisdiction to entertain such complaint. However, the opponent No.1 gave admission in the affidavit that the resort at Mahabaleshwar was not ready and it was further admitted that the complainant was allotted membership thereof being No.63795 for Mahabaleshwar Regular Apartment and that the complainant paid to the opponent No.1 an amount of `78,000/-. Since, there was admission in respect of agreement as well as receipt of money, the forum below allowed the complaint and directed the opponent/appellant herein to refund an amount of `78,000/- along with an interest @18% p.a. from 27/01/1996 till realization of amount and also directed to pay `500/- as costs to the complainant. Aggrieved by this order, the original opponent No.1 has filed this appeal.
(4) We have perused the impugned order and documents on record. We are finding that there is Time Share Agreement regarding Holiday Resort at Mahabaleshwar to be constructed by the appellant company. They had not constructed the holiday resort at Mahabaleshwar, they had not made any arrangements for their stay in Mahabaleshwar at their cost. The forum below found that there was deficiency on the part of the opponent and they have admitted the execution of agreement, they have admitted receipt of an amount of `78,000/- from the complainant and they have admitted that they had not constructed holiday resort at Mahabaleshwar and therefore the forum below clear-cut hold that there was deficiency in service on the part the opponent No.1 and the forum below has rightly allowed the complaint and passed award against the appellant company. We are finding that there is no substance in the appeal preferred by the appellant company. The appellant company is 100% guilty of deficiency in service. They cheated the respondent/original complainant. The forum below granted refund of a sum of `78,000/- along with interest and passed the award rightly in favour of the respondent/original complainant. We find no substance in this appeal. Hence, the order.
ORDER
(1) Appeal stands dismissed.
(2) No order as to costs.
(3) Inform the parties accordingly.
Pronounced on 5TH December, 2011.
