Date of Filing:17.04.2009<br /> Date of Order:13.07.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 13TH DAY OF JULY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 897 OF 2009<br /> <br /> G.M. Rajendra Babu<br /> S/o. G. Mariyappa Reddy<br /> R/at No. 511, 16th Cross<br /> Indiranagar 2nd Stage<br /> Bangalore 560 038 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> M/s. Country Club (India) Ltd.<br /> Registered Office at ‘Amrutha Castle’<br /> 5-9-16, Saifabad, Opp. Secretariat<br /> Hyderabad 500 063<br /> Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director<br /> having its Branch & Administrative Office at<br /> No. 780, 9th ‘A’ Main, I Stage<br /> Indiranagar, Bangalore 560 038 Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.<br /> The facts of the case are that the complainant became member of the opposite party club by paying Rs. 1,15,000/- to the opposite party on a promise that complainant will be entitled to get a site in Sira Taluk, Tumkur District. The complainant introduced his friend Mr. Sanjay to opposite party club who agreed to allot another site to complainant. Complainant paid further sum of Rs. 40,000/- to the opposite party towards registration charges, stamp paper expenses and maintenance charges. Complainant approached opposite party to allot site and register the sale deed. But, opposite party failed to render services as promised. Complainant got issued legal notice. Even after service of notice, the opposite party neither complied the demand nor replied. Hence, the complaint seeking direction to opposite party to pay Rs. 1,55,000/- with 18% interest p.a.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite party appeared through advocate and filed defence version stating that opposite party is a club registered under Indian Companies Act 1956. The complainant being attracted by the offers made by the opposite party expressed his willingness to become member of club under the scheme known as Mr. Cool Card Life Membership and paid Rs. 1.15,000/-. Complainant was offered complimentary plots under the scheme. The complainant has to fix up the date for registration and the opposite party is ready to register the site immediately in the name of the complainant. The complainant having utilizing the club facilities with other such complimentary benefits at its best taking the undue advantage and the complainant has come up with this new plea so as to encash the entire amount. Hence, the opposite party prayed to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Arguments are heard.<br /> 4. The point for consideration is:<br /> Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount?<br /> 5. Perused documents. <br /> 6. The complainant has paid Rs. 1,15,000/- through cheque on 12.09.2006 to opposite party. The complainant has produced receipt of the opposite party dated 12.09.2006. The complainant has again paid Rs. 40,000/- on 15.12.2006 through ICICI Bank. The complainant has produced receipt to that effect issued by the opposite party. Totally, the complainant has paid Rs. 1,55,000/-. It is the case of the complainant that as per the commitment the opposite party has not allotted site and failed to execute the sale deed. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant had issued legal notice demanding refund of the amount with interest. Even after service of notice the opposite party failed to comply the demand. Therefore, the complainant has forced to file the complaint. As per the defence version there is no dispute whatsoever in respect of payment made by the complainant. The opposite party has not produced any documents or any other acceptable evidence to show that layout has been formed and sites are ready for allotment and registration. Therefore, it is clear that the opposite party has not formed any layout at present. Therefore, it is just, fair and reasonable to order the opposite party to refund the amount with interest. The Hon’ble State Commission and National Commission are awarding interest in the similar nature of complaints. Since, the opposite party has utilised the amount of the complainant it is bound to pay the interest. I feel grant of interest at 12% p.a. in this case would be just, fair and reasonable. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> 7. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 1,55,000/- to the complainant along with 12% interest p.a. from the date of respective payments made by the complainant till payment / realisation.<br /> 8. The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- as costs of the present proceedings to the complainant.<br /> 9. The opposite party has to comply the order within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.<br /> 10. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 11. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 13TH DAY OF JULY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER<br /> <br />