Order-11.

Date-10/01/2017.

       Shri Kamal De, President.

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

The case of the Complainant, in short, is that on 10.07.2016 a membership was executed in between the Complainant and the Authority, Country Vacations (A Division of Country India Limited) for purchase of a membership No. CVKKITCLUB 10B223106 dated 10.07.2016. It alleged that she had to mail Central Customer Care Department of the Company for harassment for not providing money receipt for Rs.30,000/-. She also faced financial problems due to her retirement from the service and employment problem and the Complainant vide her representation dated 27.07.2016 approached the authority of Country Vacations for allowing resignation from membership and refunding the deposited membership fee of Rs.1,60,000/-.The Complainant has not utilized any facilities as incorporated in the copy of the said agreement dated 10.07.2016. The Complainant has also stated that she is ready to return the gift of one J-1 Model Smart Phone of Samsung make offered by the Company.The cause of action as stated by the Complainant arose 10.07.2016.The Complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.1,60,000/- with Bank interest and other reliefs in terms of the prayers in the petition of the Complainant.

The OP has contested the case contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable either in law or in fact and theComplaint petition does not disclose any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. It is also stated that the Complainant is not a consumer in terms of the CP Act, 1986. It is also denied that the Complainant has not receivedany money receipt from Country Vacations. It is stated that she herself has annexed copies of money receipts along with her petition of complaint. The Complainant has also stated about her financial problem due to her retirement and employment. It is stated that the Complainant has never been subjected to any deficiency.  It is stated that the case is not maintainable. The OP has prayed for dismissal of the case.

Point for Decision

1)         Whether the OP has been deficient in rendering service to the Complainant?

2)         Whether the OP has indulged in unfair trade practice?

3)         Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons

            We have perused the documents on record namely, photocopy of letter dated 27.07.2016 addressed to the Accounts Executive by the Complainant, photocopy of the purchase agreement of  Country Vacations Holiday Club membership dated 10.07.2016, photocopies of payment receipts and other documents on record.

            It appears from a plain reading of the petition of complaint that it is the specific admission of the Complainant that she intended to resign from the membership of the Club for financial problem due to her retirement from job. She has not alleged any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. We find that the complaint petition does not disclose any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The Complainant has not alleged any unfair trade practice against the OPs. The definition of “Deficiency”as defined under section 2(g) of the C.P. Act, does not cover the claims arising under the present dispute. Moreover, we find that she has filed the case against the Accounts Executive of Country Vacation who never held anyagreement with the Complainant and/or is not liable to provide any service or goods to the Complainant, neither in his personal capacity nor in his official capacity. There is also noprivity of contract between the Complainant and the OP. We find that the Complainant has filed his case not alleging any deficiency of service but for refund of deposited amount of Rs.1,60,000/-. It also appears that the complaint does not reveal that the Complainant ever requested any one to provide her with any service / benefits whatsoever as per the terms of the Agreement dated 10.07.2016. The OP is neither a private individual nor a juristic entity in the eye of Law. We find that the Complainant had entered into an agreement with one M/s. Country Vacations and the OP has no relation with the said agreement. The OP is not even a witness or even beneficiary of the said agreement. The petition of complaint does not disclose any question of deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. The Complainant does not allege any deficiency of service in the petition of complaint. Every complaint should clearly contain particulars of dispute and the relief claimed. But, we are afraid the Complainant does not allege any deficiency of service against the OP. It is not also the case of the Complainant that the OP Company or OP obtained the purchase agreement dated 10.07.2016 through mis-representation or otherwise. We think that the Complainant’s petition does not disclose any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs so as to be adjudicated by a Consumer Court in a summary trial.

In result, the case fails.

Hence,

Ordered

That the instant case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP.

            The Complainant, however, reserves rights to approach the appropriate Civil Court to seek her remedy, if so advised. The Complainant may take advantage  of the relief of theHon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute (II) (1995) CPJ-I SC to seek exclusion of the time spent in prosecuting the OP before this Forum.

            We pass no order as to cost.