Per Mrs.S.P. Lale, Hon’ble Member

1.       This appeal is filed by the org. complainant/appellant whose complaint was dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai Suburban vide order dated 27/11//2009 passed in consumer complaint No.277/2004.

2.       Undisputed facts are that the complainant/appellant had purchased Time-share Membership of opponent/respondent for stay in resort of opponent at Lonawala bearing Membership No.47036 for `95,000/- and Membership No.76355 for `1,05,000/-.  According to the complainant, the facilities under Membership bearing No.47036 provided stay in Regular Apartment, which consists of fully furnished apartment of 1 bedroom, 1 living room, dining area and 1 kitchen in Resort of opponent/respondent at Lonawala.  The facilities under Membership bearing No.76355 provided stay in Twin Apartment which consists of fully furnished apartment of 2 bedrooms, 1 living room, dining area and 1 kitchen in Resort at Lonawala.  It is alleged by the complainant/appellant that the complainant and his family members were not able to enjoy the facility of Resort at Lonawala due to non-completion of construction of Resort of the opponent/respondent.  The complainant further alleged that the membership provided by the opponent under Membership No.47036 was in respect of Regular Apartment and not as per time-share certificate.  Therefore, the complainant was unable to enjoy the allotted weeks of holidays at Lonawala and to deposit entitlement week with RCI India Pvt. Ltd.  It is further alleged by the complainant that opponent has not acted at par with terms and conditions of the contract and have wrongly adjusted the holiday account unilaterally in the absence of any written intimation from the complainant.  Therefore, the complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Consumer Forum and claimed 18% p.a. interest on consideration amount paid to the opponent as Membership fee along with damages and compensation. 

3.       The opponent/respondent have filed their written version and denying the contents of the consumer complaint.  The opponents contended that as per the agreement entered into between the parties, the complainant is entitled for one week holiday in any of the Resort of the opponent/Company and as per terms of the agreement, complainant has enjoyed almost all his holidays from 1997.  Opponent further pleaded that the complainant is a member of opponent/Company and was allotted membership No.76355 from 10^th October to 17^th October from the year 1997 and he has also member of RCI.  The complainant can enjoy 7 days holiday in any of the Resort of the opponent in that year and can also enjoy holidays with RCI provided the complainant deposit their holidays in advance as per the rules of the RCI.  Opponent further pleaded that the complainant had enjoyed, utilized 42 days of his holidays at different Resorts of the opponent/Company out of total entitlement of 56 days i.e. 7 days per year for 8 years.  After enjoying, utilizing these holidays for 8 years, now the complainant has filed this complaint with intention to make money out of it.  According to the opponent, there was no deficiency in service on their part and finally prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.       After considering the documents and affidavits placed before it, the Learned District Consumer Forum dismissed the complaint and passed the impugned order.

5.       We heard Ms.Rashmi Manne, Advocate proxy for Mr.U.B. Wavikar, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.Komal Singh, Advocate for the respondent.

6.       The rights of time-share holder are printed on the backside of the Timeshare certificate under clause No.2 and it is obligation of the Company as specified under clause 4.  As per said clause, Company was provided with holidays.  The appellant/complainant and his family members enjoyed the holidays with the opponent/Company at various Resorts as mentioned in Para 7 & 8.  Therefore, the complainant and his family members even after filing complaint had enjoyed their holidays at the Resort of the opponent/Company.  As per the policy of the opponent, total accumulation allowed is 28 days and as far as complainant is concerned, there is no maximum limit for his accumulation of holidays.  The complainant can accumulate holidays as many as he wishes as his Lonawala Resort is not fully completed.  The main grievance of the complainant is that the opponent/respondent had miscalculated in the Membership No.76355, therefore, the complainant has loss of 14 days holidays and in case of Membership No.47036, the complainant has loss of 9 days holidays.  Another grievance of the complainant is that the opponent/respondent has failed to provide accommodation facility as agreed in the Timeshare certificate. However, due to unavoidable circumstances, the opponent/Company could not complete the Lonawala Resort and as per the agreement, the opponent/Company had provided alternative holiday facility to the complainant/appellant.  As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of opponents/respondents herein.  Therefore, there is no question of giving any compensation or interest on the consideration amount.  Even the complainant has enjoyed almost all of his holidays at various Resorts of the opponent/Company.  The complainant has also not deposited their holidays with RCI in advance. 

7.       Under these circumstances, we find, the Forum after considering the material placed on record, rightly passed the impugned order, and there is no reason to interfere with it.  Hence, there being no merit in the appeal, we pass the following order :-

                   -: ORDER :-

1.       Appeal stands dismissed.

2.       No order as to costs.

3.       Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.

Pronounced

Dated 20^th April 2011.