Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/1062/2016

Mrs Mandeep Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Country Club Hospitallity and Holidays Ltd. (CCHHL) - Opp.Party(s)

Vandana

15 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/1062/2016
Date of Institution	:	13/12/2016
Date of Decision	:	15/05/2018

 

Mandeep Kaur wife of Vikram Singh Dalal, resident of House No.3303, Riverdale Apartments, Air Force Station Patiala Road, Zirakpur.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

M/s Country Club Hospitality & Holidays Limited (CCHHL), Branch Office at Chandigarh SCO 44-45, above Punjab National Bank, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh, through its Authorized Signatory/M.D.

……Opposite Party

CORAM :	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                               

       

PRESENT:	:	Sh. M.S. Saini, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh. Pradeep Sharma, Counsel for Opposite Party.

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.         The facts of the consumer complaint, in brief, are that the Complainant purchased membership of the Opposite Party by paying the membership fee of Rs.1,50,000/-, whereafter an Agreement dated 07.09.2015 was executed interse them. Per agreement, the Complainant was eligible for free 6 nights 7 days say in any of the properties of the Opposite Party. The Complainant booked her first vacation trip at Shimla from 19.07.2016 to 21.07.2016 through Opposite Parties. It has been alleged that the room booked by the Opposite Party for the Complainant in Hotel Wingait Inn was in a bad shape with ugly curtains and dirty bedsheets and blankets. To cap it all, the Complainant was asked to pay Rs.1000/- per day for the said bad shaped room, which she had to pay under the compelling circumstances; whereas, as per the agreement the Complainant was entitled for at least three star accommodation with superior rooms. After horrendous vacations, the Complainant took up the matter with the Opposite Party, highlighting the deficiencies, with a request to refund her amount, but to no success. Hence, alleging that the aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case.
3.         The Opposite Party in its written statement has not disputed the factual matrix of the case. It has been averred that after negotiations the Complainant paid Rs.1,50,000/- on 07.09.2015 towards one time non-refundable vacation charges under the Vacation Agreement and the Club Membership  was given free of cost along with vacation agreement. The plan opted by the Complainant was Blue Studio Season Premium under which she is entitled to vacation membership for 30 years with domestic (India) vacation benefits. It has been pleaded that the Hotel Wingait Inn Shims is a three star hotel and from internal investigation by Opposite Party, it was found that grievance of the Complainant was false and baseless as she never made any Complaint or protest to the Manager or any other employee of Hotel Wingait Inn Shimla during her stay thus the request of the Complainant for refund of agreed non-refundable vacation charges was not adhered to. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         Controverting the allegations contained in the written statement and reiterating the pleadings in the Complaint, the Complainant filed the replication.
5.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 
6.         We have gone through the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the Learned Counsel for the Parties.
7.         Admittedly, the Complainant booked her first vacation trip for Shimla for 19.07.2016 to 21.07.2017 with the Opposite Party. The Complainant has alleged that she was asked to pay charges @ Rs.1000/- per day for a single room for stay, which was not a part of the agreement. However, we are not impressed with the same, as on perusal of Clause 9 of the agreement, we find that it has been clearly mentioned that an exchange fee can also apply if the property is in domestic/international associated locations. Moreover, the Complainant had paid the said charges in advance and without any protest.
8.         Now, on adverting to the other allegations of the Complainant regarding bad condition of the room, curtains, bed sheets, pungent smell etc., we feel that the same are without any evidence, in as much as, the Complainant did not make any written Complaint or raised her concern to the Management of the said hotel qua her grievance, during her stay. 
9.         The Complainant has sought refund of the amount paid to the Opposite Parties. However, on perusal of the Agreement executed interse the parties, we find that there is an express clause which states that the vacation charges is not refundable under any circumstances and the vacation fee is not a refundable deposit. Moreover, the terms and conditions enumerated therein are binding on the parties. Thus, we find that the whole gamut of facts and circumstances leans towards the side of the Opposite Party. The case is lame of strength and therefore, liable to be dismissed.
10.         For the reasons recorded above, we do not find any shred of evidence to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party. Consequently, the Consumer Complaint fails and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.    
11.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced                        

15.05.2018

                                 Sd/-

(RATTAN SINGH THAKUR)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

      

                           Sd/-

 (SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER

“Dutt”