BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE (ADDL. BENCH)
DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF OCTOBER 2024
PRESENT
SRI RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SMT. SUNITA .C. BAGEWADI, MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 192/2013
1. | M/s Country Club (India) Ltd., No.273, Defence Colony, H.A.L. 2nd Stage, Bangalore 560 038. | … Appellant/s |
2. | M/s Country Club (I) Ltd., Amrutha Castle, 5-9-16, Saifabad, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, Both are represented by its Asst. Administrative Manager. (By Sri V. Sreenidhi, Advocate) | |
V/s
Mr. Nestor Rodriguse, No.22, R/at C.K. Garden, St. Thomas Town, Bangalore. (By Sri Udayshankar, Advocate) | … Respondent/s |
ORDER
SMT. SUNITA .C. BAGEWADI, MEMBER
The appellants/Opposite Parties have preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.17.01.2013 passed in CC.No.618/2012 on the file of 4th Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore which directed the appellants to pay a sum of Rs.2,06,606/- to the complainant with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of Order, till realization along with costs.
2. The crux of the complaint is as under;
It is the case of the complainant that the complainant was a Super Cool Privilage Card Member of the Opposite Party and paid the initial amount of Rs.20,000/- towards the membership fees in the month of December 2005 and the Opposite Party No.1 issued the receipt. The total membership fees was Rs.1,99,000/- and the complainant has paid Rs.2,00,000/- towards membership fee on various dates. The Opposite Party No.1 has offered allotment of plot at Coconut Grove at Bangalore. The Opposite Party has also collected administration charges from the complainant, till December 2009. Inspite of repeated requests, the Opposite Party has neither allotted the site nor refund the amount. Hence, the complainant issued a legal notice to the Opposite Parties calling upon to pay compensation of Rs.7,33,229/- and the Opposite Party replied to the said notice making baseless allegations. Hence, the complaint.
3. After service of notice, the Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and filed version. The Opposite Parties have admitted the membership of the complainant and payment fee of Rs.1,99,000/- and Rs.20,000/- for registration charges. The Opposite Party submitted that the complainant has become a member only to enjoy the club facilities provided by them and the Opposite Party as a goodwill offered complimentary site to the complainant. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable and prayed to dismiss the complaint.
4. After trial, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Opposite Party to pay Rs.2,06,606/- to the complainant with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of Order, till realization along with Rs.2,000/- as costs.
5. Aggrieved by the said Order, the Opposite Parties are in appeal. Heard the arguments from both sides.
6. On perusal of the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, it is an admitted fact that, the respondent became Super Cool Privilege Card Member by paying Rs.2,20,000/- in order to avail the club facilities across the country. Further, it is also not in dispute that the Opposite Party offered site to the respondent at Coconut Grove at Bangalore. Perused the Order. It is evident that as per the receipts issued by the appellants/Opposite Parties, the respondent has paid Rs.2,06,606/- and even after receipt of the said amount, the appellants inspite of repeated requests neither provided the club facilities nor allotted the site to the respondent. It is the bounden duty of the appellants to provide the facilities as promised. Hence, the order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with law. When the respondent availed a life membership by paying Rs.2,20,000/-for club facilities and allotment of site, the appellants ought to provide facilities as promised and any point of time should not deny. The District Commission has rightly appreciated respondent’s evidence and directed the appellants to pay the above said amount. The order passed by the District Commission is in accordance with Law. It is a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the appellants/Opposite Parties in denying the facilities as assured. Hence, we proceed to pass the following;
O R D E R
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to cost.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned District Commission for disbursement of the same to the respondent/complainant by obtaining proper identification.
Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
KCS*
