BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE URBAN

    12^th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020

Complainant/s: -                           

Sri.Vinod Ranjan

Joint holders of

M/s.Vinra Enterprises

Pvt., Ltd., D/52,

Beary’s Anugraha Apartments,

18, Patel H.Ramaiah Road, KSFC Layout,

Lingarajapuram,

Bengaluru-84.

By Adv.Sri.K.Sundaram

V/s

Opposite party/s:-    

M/s.Snap Fitness

Insatuable Fitness Solutions, 5AC/402, Lamcy Plaza,

2^nd Floor, HRBR

2^nd Block, Kalyannagar,

Bengaluru-43.

By Adv.Sri.Guruprasad.M.N

ORDER

SRI. S.L PATIL, PRESIDENT

The Complainant has filed this complaint U/s.12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, seeking direction against the Opposite Party (herein after called as OP) to pay Rs.19,000/- collected towards membership fees and personal training; to pay interest at 18% p.a.; to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/-; to pay cost and to award such other reliefs.

2. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

The Complainant submits that, he became the member of OP by paying annual membership fees of Rs.14,000/- and personal training of Rs.5,000/-. As he preferred to workout in a free atmosphere without many people around, the OP assured that during his workout period the gym will be free of congestion, to this, the Complainant paid extra Rs.5,000/- towards personal training. In the beginning itself, he realized that the gym will be always crowded and no special facilities can be provided to the Complainant as assured. Further, the fitness centre was not well equipped to handle the number of persons and was without proper ventilation or recirculation of fresh air, due to which the Complainant along with others were compelled to breath hot carbandioxide, the pleasant odour caused by perspiration by several persons at a time. The same brought to the notice of OP. Inspite of repeated complaints, OP failed to take any corrective measure and failed to keep up their promise as assured. Being dissatisfied, the Complainant sought cancelation of membership and refund of the paid amount, but they denied the refund on flimsy ground. Hence this complaint.

3. After issuance of notice, OP did appear and filed version denying the contents of the complaint. OP in its version submits that, OP never made any assurance as stated in the complaint. The Complainant became the member for the period of one year only. By that time, OP has clearly explained that the facilities which are going to be provided is to work out inside the establishment by using the equipments and also for the fitness solutions. Further, OP has clearly explained that the amount which is going to be paid is a non-refundable and non-transferable amount. Agreeing with all terms and conditions the Complainant become the member by paying Rs.14,000/-. The Complainant is entitled to utilize unlimited gym facilities inside the establishment for the agreed period for said one year from the date of joining. Further, the OP collected Rs.5,000/- towards personal training to provide the special facility that the separate trainer will stood by the side of the Complainant by teaching the Complainant when he was doing workouts in the gym. There is no crowd in the establishment as alleged, since there is a proper arrangement made by the OP to provide workout time and space for all the members comfortably. The Complainant does not agrees and convenience in any manner. There is no irregularity or nowhere causes any kind of harassment or agony to the Complainant. No deficiency of service of any kind was caused by the OP as such in view of above facts, OP is not liable to pay any kind of amount to the Complainant. Hence on these grounds and other grounds OP prays for dismissal of the complaint.

4. The Complainant to substantiate his case filed affidavit evidence and produced the documents. OP filed affidavit evidence and produced the documents.  Both filed written arguments. Heard. We have gone through the available materials on record.

5. The points that arise for our consideration are:

1. Whether the Complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OP, if so, entitled for the relief sought for?

2. What order?

        6. Our answer to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:- In the negative

Point No.2:- As per final order

REASONS

7. Point No.1: We have briefly stated the contents of the complaint as well as the version filed by OP. The undisputed facts which reveal from the pleadings of the parties go to show that, the Complainant become the member of the OP/Snap Fitness Insatiable Fitness Solutions by paying annual membership fees/Doc.A1 & B1 of Rs.14,000/- and another sum of Rs.5,000/- for personal training/Doc.B2.

8. According to the Complainant, the service provided by the OP is not up to the mark. This fact was brought to the notice of OP, but they did not care about it. Hence, being dissatisfied, he sought for refund of the entire paid amount. The OP by way of filing version specifically contended that, the allegations made by the Complainant are baseless. The OP has provided very good service, but it is the Complainant by one or the other pretext raised the objections for silly reasons. Inspite of providing good service, he knocked the door of this forum to get redress his remedy by dubious methods.

9. It is also the specific case of the OP that, once the amount/fee is paid it is not refundable. According to the terms and conditions, the Complainant became the member of the OP by paying Rs.14,000/- for the period of one year. For which the Complainant is entitled to utilize unlimitedly the gym facilities inside the establishment for the agreed period of said one year from the date of joining. Even though the Complainant has raised baseless allegations, OP has provided special trainer, inspite of it he did not satisfy.

10. As to know, whether the service provided by the OP is not up to the mark is not specifically proved by the Complainant. Mere allegations as against the OP in respect of the service rendered by it, is substandard, is not sufficient but it is to be proved by cogent evidence. In this context evidence is scanty. Under such circumstances, we come to the conclusion that, the amount so paid by the Complainant is non-refundable and we do not find any deficiency of service on the part of OP. Hence the complaint filed by the Complainant is liable to be dismissed devoid of any merits. Accordingly we answered point No.1 in the negative.

  11. Point No.2: In the result, we passed the following:         

  O R D E R

The complaint filed by the Complainant is dismissed devoid of any merits. Looking to the circumstances of the case we direct both parties to bear their own costs.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this 12^th day of February 2020)

        MEMBER                                             PRESIDENT

Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant dated.17.02.16

Sri.Vinod Ranjan, the Complainant

Copies of Documents produced by the Complainant:

Witnesses examined on behalf of the OP dated.02.04.16

Sri.Naveen Varadarajan, Director   

Copies of Documents produced by OP

            MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT