Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/10/1321

Sri.Nandeesh Kumar.R.S. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Country Club India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shashi Kumar.R.

08 Oct 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMERS DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANGALORE URBAN,Ph:22352624
No:8, 7th floor, Sahakara bhavan, Cunningham road, Bangalore- 560052.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/10/1321

Sri.Nandeesh Kumar.R.S.
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Country Club India Ltd.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. Anita Shivakumar. K 2. Ganganarsaiah 3. Sri D.Krishnappa

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

O R D E R SMT. ANITA SHIVAKUMAR. K, MEMBER Brief facts of the complaint filed by the complainant against the Op (hereinafter called as Op for short) are that he agreed to become a Mr.cool member of the Op club as per Op’s invitation. That he accordingly became a Mr. Cool member bearing no: COOLCG 8030 by paying membership fee of Rs.1,15,000/- in three installments through cheques. Op had issued receipts for the amounts he received dated 8/3/2007, 12/5/2007 and 26/5/2007. With that the Op had offered to allot a site at country club layout at Tumkur also many other holiday packages and stay, trips. Complainant waited without utilizing any facility from the Op, and enquired about the registration of site. On 17/4/2007 Op sent allotment letter stating that by paying registration charges of Rs.15,000/- complainant can register the complementary site measuring 1089 sq.ft. at Vedic spa phase VII part B in site no:125 situated in Coconut Grove. After the receipt of allotment letters of Op, complainant enquired to go through the area and blue print of layout. But nobody behaves properly with complainant. Complainant enquired about the plots and phase A - II, then complainant came to know that there is no such A II phase formed in Karnataka and the said land is situated in Andra Pradesh. No developmental work done there. Complainant requested Op to register the site in coconut groove vedic Spa, at Tumkur, Op keep on postponing the matter. When complainant found such a misrepresentation made by the Op, he decided to withdraw his membership from Op and also get back his amount. Complainant issued legal notice dated 3/5/2010 calling upon the Op to cancel the membership and refund his money. Neither Op neither replied for the legal notice nor refunded his amount back. Hence, complainant approached this forum to direct the Op to refund Rs.1,15,000/-with interest @ 24%and, direct op to pay Rs.14,666/- paid towards service charges along with 24% interest and compensation of Rs.3 lacs, and other reliefs. 2. Op has appeared through his advocate and filed version. Op in his version has contended that the complaint is not maintainable and denied deficiency in their service. Ops have admitted that the complainant has become a member of that club called Mr.cool vedic spa member bearing no. COOLCG 8030 by paying membership fee of Rs.1,15,000/- which is non-refundable membership fee. It is further admitted that along with membership fee they have offered a free site no.125 as complimentary to the membership taken and was gift to the members. That the complainant did not get the site registered though complimentary site bearing no:125 at phase A II part B measuring 1089 in vedic spa project allotted and the same has been intimated in allotment letter dated 17/4/2007 stating that within 30 days from receipt of the letter the same registration can be done by the payment of Rs.15,000/-. But complainant not shown interest to register it and thereby has prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint the complainant and op have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant along with the complaint has produced the copy of offer letter of Op, copy of allotment letter, copy of the receipt for having paid towards membership fee, copy of receipts regarding amount paid towards service charges, copy of the legal notice sent to Op regarding refund of his amount. Counsel for op argued, counsel for complainant was absent, taken as heard and perused the records. 4. On the above materials, following points for determination arise. 1. Whether the complainant proves that the Op has caused deficiency in their service in not allotting sites and in not providing other facilities as promised? 2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to? 5. Our findings are as under: Point No.1: In the affirmative Point No.2: See the Final order REASONS 6.Answer on Point No.1: As we have gone through the contention of both parties, there is no dispute between them, in this complainant having had become a Mr.cool membership bearing no. COOLCG 8030 by paying Rs.1,15,000/- as membership fee that the Op has offered a site. The offer letter contains all facilities which are offered by the Op and along with that Op told him to pay Rs.15,000/-towards registration charges for complementary site for confirmation . As these facts are not disputed, the only dispute between the Parties remains for decision is regarding non-registration of site as promised. 7. It is the grievance of the complainant that despite he approaching the Op several times Op did not registered sites as promised. In the allotment letter of Op dated 17/4/2007 , had offered to allot a site of 1089 sq.ft at coconut groove Vedic Spa site. Complainant has asked in his prayer for refund of his membership fee on the ground that he cannot trust the Op and do not wish to continue his relationship with them. But the Op as stated above have not controverted the statement of complainant and dissatisfaction but Op is still telling that he is ready to register the site. On considering all these facts placed before us, we find that there is nothing wrong in this complainant asking for the relief of refund of membership fee because of non response or due to lack sincerity on the Op that we find there is no genuinity in allotment also. 8. If we carefully look at this offer, the offers in our view appear to be an uncertain and non-existing because it is not clear where exactly that coconut grove vedic spa exists. In this way it is found that the Op has offered such type of free plots to attract the people to become their members by paying heavy amount. Similarly the offers made in this case also exhibit uncertainty. It is found that the complainant became a member on 26/5/2007 by paying full amount. He has repeatedly stated that despite approaching the Op they did not register the plot. 9. Op has neither registered the site as assured nor refunded his amount though complainant requested by submitting written requests. Even Op did not take any trouble to communicate to complainant. If the contention of the Op that they offered to allot the site is located in Andra Pradesh, where exactly exists and the offer is really genuine tell the complainant to get documents registered a complimentary site by meeting registration expenditure but it is evident that the Op has not even come forward to prove that they have formed any layout or sites at all leave alone execution of documents. Through the developments that have taken place in this case, we are of the view, the claim of the opponents do not inspire confidence in us and also in the complainant. Therefore under those circumstances complainant opted for taking back his membership fee which cannot be denied. 10. The Op has contended as membership fee is not refundable. But it is not their case that the complainant after becoming a member has used any sort of their service like club service and other facilities offered through their offering letter. Op has not produced any such document to prove that complainant had utilized the facilities provided by the Op club. Therefore when the complainant has absolutely not availed any service of the Op and Op has not exhibited their interest in keeping their promises and sincerity in showing some progress in the formation of layout and allotment of plots they cannot have any rights for non-refundability retain complainant’s money. Hence, complaint in our view is entitled for the relief as prayed for but not for the other compensation he has sought for. Since complainant as produced the receipts issued by the Op which has paid towards service charges, complainant is entitled for that amount also. Therefore, from the date of full payment, the complainant would become entitle for interest on the money to be refunded. With the result, we answer point No.1 in the affirmative and pass the following order. . O R D E R Complaint is allowed. Op is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- to the complainant with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of payments till it is repaid. Op shall refund that amount with interest within 45 days from the date of this order. Ops shall also pay cost of Rs.2, 000/- to the complainant. Dictated to the Stenographer. Got it transcribed and corrected. Pronounced in the Open forum on this the 08th October 2010. MEMBER PRESIDENT




......................Anita Shivakumar. K
......................Ganganarsaiah
......................Sri D.Krishnappa