DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

    Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No. 332/2016

1. Sunny Verma

S/o Shri Shiv Prasad Verma

2. Manju Verma

W/o Sunny Verma

Both resident of House No. 23,

Gali No. 8, Surender Colony Part-2,

Jharoda Majra, Burari, Delhi-110084

                                                                                  ….Complainants

Versus

1. Signature Linker Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Authorized Person,

K-28, 2^nd Floor, Near Vijay Sales Showrrom,

Lajpat Nagar Par-2, New Delhi-110024.

2. Mr. Anuj Pandit
3. Ms. Bhawna Pandit

Both resident of Flat No. 1131, 1^st Floor,

Sector-C, Pocket-1, Vasant Kunj,

New Delhi-110070.  

                                                     ….Opposite Parties

                                                  Date of Institution      :         17.10.16              Date of Order      :         27.08.19

Coram:

Ms. Rekha Rani, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

Member - Kiran Kaushal

1. Briefly put the complainants Sunny Verma and Manju Verma filled a brochure at the outlet of Big Bazar on 03.07.2016. They received a telephone call on 04.07.2016 on complainant’s mobile and subsequently an email from ‘gift@signaturelinkers.com’ was also sent by Signature Linkers Pvt. Ltd. hereinafter referred to as OP-1. OP-2 and OP-3 are representatives of OP-1. According to the OPs, complainants won holiday voucher for 3 nights & 4 days at is hotels. The voucher was worth Rs.15,000/- and to collect the same, OP invited the complainant to come OP’s office in the same evening. 
   1. It is alleged that OP induced the complainants by false representation and made the complainant sign certain documents. The complainant was assured by the representative of OP that the complainant could revoke the said agreement within seven days.
   2. The complainants were further told that they were registered for five years regular studio on 02/02 occupancy for Blue Season Type Membership and the complainants would have to pay Rs.50,000/- in EMI but if the complainants paid in cash or through the credit card then the complainants would have to pay only Rs.44,000/-. Lured by the discount offered, the complainants paid Rs.44,000/- to OP through his credit card and OP issued a receipt against the same.
   3. It is averred that the complainant on the next day i.e. 05.07.2016 read the purchase agreement which was nothing but merely an eye wash. It was a false and fabricated document, therefore feeling cheated, complainants requested the OPs to refund their amount of Rs.44,000/- but the representative of OP refused to do so and told the complainants that there was no provision of refund after payment. Thereafter, the complainants sent legal notice to OP dated 07.07.2016 but OP did not reply to the same.
   4. The complainants made various calls to OPs and kept following up to get the amount refunded. Finally the complainants on 05.10.2016 approached the office of OPs where they were told that three cheques worth Rs.32,000/- of different dates were dispatched and the remaining balance amount was adjusted.
   5. The complainants alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice prayed to direct OP-1 to refund Rs.44,000/- deposited by the complainants along with interest. Additionally, it is prayed that OP-1 be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for mental and physical harassment and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation expenses.
2. OP-1 was duly served. None put in appearance on behalf of the OP-1. Therefore, OP-1 was proceeded exparte vide order dated 09.03.2017.
3. Exparte evidence and written submissions are filed on behalf of the complainants.
4. Averments made in the complaint and evidence led by the complainants have remained uncontroverted and unchallenged. Hence there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the complainants and perusing the material placed on record, it is observed that the complainants purchased membership from OP-1 and paid consideration amount of Rs.44,000/-. The payment receipt of the same is exhibited as Ex.CW-1/3. The complainants in their written submission admitted that OP has refunded Rs.32,000/- to the complainants. The issue to be decided before the Forum is that of the refund of Rs.12,000/- which was not refunded by OP. It is noticed that from the payment receipt that OP had charged Rs.12,000/- towards administration fee and Rs.32,000/- was charged as initial deposit. Accordingly, OP has refunded the initial deposit.
6. It is complainants’ case that they sought refund from OP on the very next day of making the payment and it was after considerable follow ups and sending legal notice that OP refunded Rs.32,000/-. There is no justification for having charges Rs.12,000/- for administrative charges when the request for refund was made the very next day. However, considering the fact that OP would have incurred some administration charges. This Forum is of the opinion that OP could retain Rs.4,000/- towards administration charges.
7. Further, OP having paid the consideration amount and not availing any service, OP is liable to pay to refund the excess money charged. Accordingly, we allow the complaint and hold OP guilty of unfair trade practice. OP is directed to refund Rs.8,000/- along with @ 6% interest from the date of payment made i.e. 04.07.2016 till realization within 45 days of receipt of copy this order. Failing which the OP shall become liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.8,000/- from the date of payment made i.e. 04.07.2016 till realization. Additionally, OP is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental harassment and litigation cost.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 27.08.19.