Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

2115/2009

Suresh Narayana Reddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Country Club [india] Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

16 Sep 2009

ORDER


BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. 2115/2009

Suresh Narayana Reddy
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

M/s Country Club [india] Ltd
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON: 31.08.2009 DISPOSED ON: 25.08.2010 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 25TH AUGUST 2010 PRESENT:- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT No.2115/2009 COMPLAINANT OPPOSITE PARTY Mr. Suresh Narayana Reddy, Aged about 38 years, S/o Narayana Reddy, R/at No.G-3, Elite Home Apartments, 7th Cross, Subbanapalya, Banasawadi, Jaijawan Nagar, Bangalore – 560 033. Advocate: Sri M.S.AswathaReddy V/s. M/s Country Club (India) Ltd., No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main, Indiranagar, 1st Stage, Bangalore – 560 038. Rep: by its Regional Manager. Advocate: Sri S.Harish O R D E R SRI. B.S. REDDY, PRESIDENT The complainant filed this complaint u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986, seeking direction against Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to pay sum of Rs.2,20,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. on an allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. 2. The case of the complainant is to be stated in brief is that: OP has implemented a scheme called as “Mr. Cool” vide its broachers to impress general public offering certain assurances including allotment of free plot at Coconut Grove Vedic Spa. The complainant being impressed of the scheme subscribed for the membership with OP club by paying an amount of Rs.1,45,000/- on 14.04.2004. Upon receiving the said amount OP has a bounded duty to meet commitment of providing the facilities assured under offer / scheme. But however OP never bothered to comply with commitments. OP assured to provide complimentary plot measuring 1500 sq. ft. at Kodaikenal and demanded an additional amount of Rs.25,000/-. The said sum of which also paid by the complainant. OP failed to provide the facilities in the club and also failed in giving services as assured. The complainant requested OP to provide the service as free trip to Goa by flight and other things as assured, but OP has not provided the services. The complainant suffered lot of mental agony and hardship. The complainant is entitled for refund of membership fee of Rs.1,45,000/- and additional sum of Rs.25,000/- paid subsequently, he is also entitled for compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and hardship. In all complainant is entitled for Rs.2,20,000/- with interest of 24% p.a. Hence the complaint. 3. On appearance, OP filed the version contending that the complainant is not a consumer and since transaction become a commercial transaction. OP undertakes to allot any alternative site within two months, the complainant is enjoying the facilities provided by OP in their clubs. OP offered only a complimentary site to persons becoming a permanent member, at its projects and they had not assured any other complimentary site as contended by the complainant. It is admitted that the complainant has paid sum of Rs.1,45,000/- towards the membership fee. It is denied OP has not provided any services on the other hand OP is providing all the facilities as promised; complimentary site has been allotted to the complainant. It is admitted that complainant has paid sum of Rs.25,000/- for allotment of site. The said amount was towards registration and maintenance fee. It is denied that complainant is entitled for refund of the membership fee and for compensation of Rs.50,000/- for alleged mental agony and hardship. The complainant has never placed any request for availing the services and OP is providing all the facilities, complainant is at liberty to avail the facilities. The complainant is not entitled for sum of Rs.2,20,000/- with interest at 24% p.a. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaint. 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed affidavit evidence and produced documents. The General Manager (Operation) of OP filed affidavit evidence. 5. Complainant filed IA u/s 151 CPC seeking direction to OP to produce the documents such as title deeds, conversion order and layout plan. That IA was allowed and OP was directed to produce the documents. OP has not produced any documents as directed. 6. Complainant filed written arguments, heard from complainant side, the arguments of OP is taken as heard. Points for consideration are: Point No.1:- Whether the complainant is proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP? Point No.2:- If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the relief now claimed? Point No.3:- To what Order? 7. We record our findings on:- Point No.1:- In Affirmative. Point No.2:- Affirmative in part. Point No.3:- As per final order. R E A S O N S 8. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant being impressed of the scheme called as “Mr. Kool” as published in the broacher by OP became the member of OP club and paid an amount of Rs.1,45,000/- on 14.04.2004. The complainant has produced the receipts as document No.2 to 6 in respect of the said payment. Apart from the said payment OP has collected further sum of Rs.25,000/- on 17.06.2008, the same is evidenced by statement of account of ICICI bank of the complainant’s account. From the affidavit evidence of the complainant and complaint averments it becomes clear that this additional sum of Rs.25,000/- was collected on the ground that complimentary plot measuring 1500 sq. ft. at Kodaikenal will be allotted to the complainant. The copy of the allotment letter produced by the complainant reveals that Country Condo’s Ltd., issued the said letter on 05.08.2009 stating that site No.678 at Vedic Country Spa Project II Kool is allotted; demanding to pay sum of Rs.20,000/- towards site confirmation administrative charges which includes at the time of registration the stamp paper fee, registration expenses and along with maintenance charges for a period of 30 months. That letter of allotment was valid for a period of 30 days from the date of the letter. It is pertinent to note that the complainant was assured to allot a complimentary plot at Kodaikenal, but the allotment letter is in respect of a site situated at Vedic Country Spa Project II Kool. Further the copy of the registered gift deed received by the complainant is produced. The said gift deed is dated 13.08.2008 it is in respect of a site situated at Theni District, Periyakulam Registration District, Aundipatti Sub Registration District, Aundipatti Village. There is no material to show that the complainant has accepted the said gift, as the said gift doesn’t bear the signature of the complainant. It is stranger enough to note that when the gift deed is executed on 13.08.2008, there was no reason for issuing letter of allotment by Country Condo’s Ltd., on 05.08.2008 in respect of site No.678 of Vedic Country Spa Project II Kool. OP has not produced any title deed, conversion order, approved layout plan, inspite of direction issued by the Forum on the IA filed by the complainant. It appears that OP without having any documents regarding formation of layout and title deed in respect of any land, conversion order, only paper allotment is made and gift deed is executed without accepting the gift by the complainant. Under these circumstances we are of the view that OP failed to discharge its obligation in allotting any complimentary plot at Kodaikenal as assured, the same amounts to deficiency in service on its part. 9. In the version filed OP has not at all pleaded any thing about gift deed executed in favour of the complainant. There is no merit in the contention that membership fee is non refundable. OP has not produced any material to show that the complainant has availed any services of OP club. Under these circumstances we are of the view that the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount paid with interest at 9% p.a. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the respective date of payments till the date of realization and pay litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of this order. Send the copy of this order to both the parties free of cost. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 25th day of August 2010.) PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER Snm: