PER MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)                     The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant, on the request of Sales Representative of the opponent, he became the member of opponent. The opponent gave Membership Form without any terms and conditions on 29^th March, 2014 and collected the amount of Rs.23,625/- from the complainant. The complainant insisted to pay all the installments in cash.  But, the representative of the opponent was forcing the complainant to give twelve post dated cheques and to pay the installment by ECS system. The opponent issued letter date 5^th April, 2014 mentioning the features of the membership along with payment receipt of Rs.23,625/-. As per the representation by the representative of the opponent, the scheme price was Rs.1,57,500/-. However, in the letter, the scheme is shown Rs.1,57,500/- with 15% interest thereby collecting more than Rs.2,02,473/-. In the said letter, annual maintenance charges of Rs.5,250/- was claimed for the scheme of twenty five years.  Thus, the total amount comes to Rs.3,33,723/-.  The complainant realized that the opponent is overcharging. The plan is one sided. Therefore, the complainant approached the opponent immediately and requested to cancel the membership and refund the amount.  The complainant paid total amount of Rs.68,337/-.  The complainant also sent email dated 14^th April, 2015 requesting to discontinue the membership and refund the amount.  As there was no response, the complainant has filed this complaint for refund of amount of Rs.68,337/- with interest.  He has also claimed compensation of Rs.1 Lakh for inconvenience and litigation charge of Rs.15,000/-.

2)                The opponent appeared but failed to file written statement therefore the matter was proceeded without written statement of the opponent.  The opponent challenged this order before the Hon’ble State Commission by filing Revision Petition No.RP/15/343.  The Hon’ble State Commission dismissed the revision petition vide order dated 5^th February, 2016.  The complainant filed his affidavit of evidence along with document on record.  The opponent filed his written notes of argument on record.  In the written statement, the opponent has taken all the defences as if the opponent has filed written statement which is not permissible in law.  

3)                After hearing both the parties and after going through the record, following points arise for our consideration.

POINTS

REASONS

4) As to Point No.1 & 2 :- According to the complainant, as per representation made by the representative of the opponent, he agreed for membership and charges of Rs.1,57,500/-. But, in the letter dated 5^th April, 2014, the opponent has claimed scheme price Rs.1,57,500/- and also interest at the rate of 15% and annual maintenance charges of Rs.5,250/- per annum.  According to the complainant, the opponent claimed excess amount than the amount told in the beginning.  This fact is not denied by the opponent by filing written statement.  According to the complainant, terms and conditions were not given to the complainant at the time of membership.  The same were sent subsequently.  There is no reason to discard the submission made by the complainant.  Thus, as per evidence on record, the complainant agrees for total scheme charges of Rs.1,57,500/-.  But, the in the letter dated 5^th April, 2014, the opponent claimed more amount.  According to the complainant, on receiving letter, he immediately approached the opponent and made complaint about overcharging and requested to discontinue the membership and refund the amount.  He also sent email dated 14^th April, 2015 requesting to discontinue the membership and refund the amount.  In this email, the complainant had made clear that he approached the opponent immediately on 8^th April, 2015 and requested to discontinue the membership.  This evidence is not challenged by the opponent.  According to the opponent, the membership was not discontinued within free look period of ten days.  In the email dated 14^th April, 2015, it is made clear that he approached the opponent immediately on receiving letter and requested to discontinue the membership.  The request was made within free look period.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled to discontinue the membership and refund of amount paid by him.  According to the complainant, he paid amount of Rs.68,337/-.  This fact is not challenged by the opponent by filing written statement.  Therefore, the opponent is liable to refund the amount of Rs.68,337/- to the complainant. 

5)                The complainant has made specific allegations in the complaint about overcharging.  According to him, initially, he was told about total charges Rs.1,57,500/-.  But, in the letter dated 5^th April, 2014, the opponent has claimed more amount.  Overcharging amounts to unfair trade practice. Thus, there is sufficient evidence on record showing unfair trade practice on the part of the opponent.  Therefore, the complainant is entitled for refund of his amount with interest.  The complainant has claimed compensation of Rs.1 Lakh for inconvenience and deficiency in service.  As discussed above, the act of the opponent amounts to unfair trade practice.  The complainant send email dated 14^th April 2015 requesting for refund but the opponent failed to refund the amount.  The complainant suffered inconvenience and mental agony due to unfair trade practice of the opponent. Therefore, he is entitled for compensation.  We think, compensation of Rs.1 Lakh is excessive.  The compensation of Rs.10,000/- will suffice the purpose.  Besides this, the complainant is entitled for the litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is allowed.
2. The opponent is directed to refund Rs.68,337/- (Rs.Sixty Eight Thousand Three Hundred Thirty Seven Only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. from 3^rd July, 2015 till realization. 
3. The opponent is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand Only) to the complainant as compensation for mental agony. 
4. The opponent is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rs.Five Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this litigation.
5. The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.
6. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Pronounced on 5^th May, 2016