COMPLAINTS FILED: 29.09.2009<br /> DISPOSED ON: 28.04.2010 <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> 28TH APRIL 2010<br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. B.S. REDDY PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER<br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT Nos.2285, 2286, 2287 & 2288/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2285/09<br /> COMPLAINANT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2286/09<br /> COMPLAINANT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2287/09<br /> COMPLAINANT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.2288/09<br /> COMPLAINANT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTY<br /> Sri. A.B. Narayana,<br /> S/o Boraiah,<br /> Aged about 35 years,<br /> R/a # 96, 5th Cross,<br /> 1st Main, Mathru Layout,<br /> Yelahanka New Town,<br /> GKVK Post,<br /> Bangalore – 560 065.<br /> <br /> <br /> Smt. B.M. Vedavathi,<br /> W/o Kusha,<br /> Aged about 35 years,<br /> R/a # 243, 3rd Main, III Cross, <br /> Near Vidya Sagar School, <br /> Attur Layout,<br /> Yelahanka,<br /> Bangalore – 560 065.<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.B. Lingappa, S/o Boraiah,<br /> Aged about 35 years,<br /> R/a # 96, 5th Cross,<br /> 1st Main, Mathru Layout,<br /> Yelahanka New Town,<br /> GKVK Post, Bangalore – 560 065.<br /> Sri. Jayaram.S.,<br /> S/o A.L. Satyanarayana,<br /> Aged about 35 years,<br /> R/a # 1658/8, II Cross,<br /> Ram Mohan Puram,<br /> Bangalore – 560 021.<br /> <br /> Advocate: Sri Rajesh Shetty<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> The Country Club, <br /> Bangalore,<br /> A Division of Country Club <br /> (India) Ltd., <br /> Admin: office # 675, <br /> Old Syndicate Bank Road,<br /> 1st Stage, Indiranagar,<br /> Bangalore – 560 038.<br /> <br /> Represented by its <br /> Managing Director, <br /> Sri. Y.Rajeev Reddy.<br /> <br /> Advocate: Sri S. Harish<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> These are the complaints filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986, by the respective complainants, seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund the membership fees and pay compensation, interest and costs on an allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. <br /> <br /> As the OP in all the above complaints are common, the question involved, relief claimed being the same, in the interest of justice, in order to avoid the repetition of facts and multiplicity of reasonings, all these cases stand disposed of by this common order. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaints, are as under:<br /> <br /> 2. The complainants being lured away with advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP who promised to provide them various facilities like coverage of insurance, membership with RCI resorts, week end stay at Goa, free air ticket, allotment of complimentary plots etc., thought of becoming the member of the OP club. For convenience sake the membership number, amount paid, issuance of legal notice and the nature of membership are mentioned in the chart given below. Though the complainants invested their hard earned money they are unable to reap the fruits of their investment because of the hostile attitude of the OP. OP failed to allot the complimentary plots at coconut grove as promised and failed to provide with any of the benefits of the country club. The complainants called upon OP to refund the membership amount; OP failed to repay the same inspite of several requests and demands; the complainants got issued legal notice to pay the amount; OP neither replied the notice nor complied the demand to repay the amount. For no fault of theirs; the complainants were made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Under these circumstances they are advised to file these complaints seeking necessary reliefs as stated above. <br /> <br /> Sl. No. Complaint No. Card member ship Member ship No. Receipt No. and Date Amount claimed Admitted<br /> Amount Legal Notice<br /> 1 2285/09 Mr. Cool<br /> Card Cool CG <br /> 8089 32083<br /> 17.03.07<br /> 51764<br /> 14.05.07<br /> 33470<br /> 22.12.07 Rs. 30,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 85,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 3,000<br /> Rs.1,18,000 <br /> <br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> 28.08.09<br /> 2 2286/09 Mr. Cool Card Cool CG 8358 32549<br /> 26.03.07<br /> 53951<br /> 25.06.07<br /> 53954<br /> 25.06.07 Rs. 30,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 35,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 50,000<br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> 24.08.09<br /> 3 2287/09 Mr. Cool Card Cool CG<br /> 8135 32305<br /> 22.03.07<br /> 51792<br /> 14.05.07<br /> 11174<br /> 14.05.07 Rs. 30,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 50,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 35,000<br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> 28.08.09<br /> 4 2288/09 Mr. Cool Card Cool CG<br /> 7982 31931<br /> 15.03.07<br /> 31932<br /> 15.03.07<br /> 11582<br /> 24.05.07<br /> 52367<br /> 24.05.07<br /> 52368<br /> 24.05.07 Rs. 15,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 15,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 24,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 11,000<br /> <br /> Rs. 50,000<br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Rs.1,15,000 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 03.09.09<br /> <br /> 3. On appearance, OP filed the version. The defence set out by the OP in all these complaints is almost identical and same. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the version is as under:<br /> <br /> The complaints are all false, frivolous and vexatious the same are liable to dismissed in limine. The complainants failed to show the deficiency of service on the part of the OP. It is contended complimentary sites are allotted in favour of the complainants and complainants are enjoying the facilities provided by the OP in their clubs. OP has allotted complimentary sites in favour of the complainants and allotment letters are issued. The complainants were asked to deposit registration charges, since they have not deposited the said amount. OP was unable to register the sites in their favour. When the OP has allotted the sites and has provided all the services to the complainants, they cannot seek for refund of the membership fee more particularly when the same is non refundable. After the complainants deposits registration and maintenance charges OP would register the allotted sites in favour of the complainants. OP is not liable to refund the membership fee and pay interest. Hence it is prayed to dismiss the complaints with exemplary costs. <br /> <br /> 4. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, complainants filed their affidavit evidence and produced documents. The Customer Care Manager of the OP filed affidavit evidence in support of the defence version and produced documents. <br /> <br /> 5. OP filed written arguments. Arguments heard on both sides, the points for consideration are:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- Whether the complainants have proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of<br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No.2:- If so, whether the complainants are <br /> entitled for the reliefs now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No.3:- To what Order?<br /> <br /> 6. Our findings on the above points are: <br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative. <br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative in part. <br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> At the outset it is not in dispute that each one of these complainants became the member of OP club as noted in the chart and paid the lump sum amount. OP having accepted their membership allotted them member ship number. According to the complainants OP has not obliged to provide them the club facilities like week end holidays to Goa, Free Air ticket, forest guest house accommodation, insurance etc., apart from that the main grievances of the complainants is that OP failed to allot the complimentary sites which was promised at the time of accepting the membership fee. <br /> <br /> The defence set up by OP is these complainants have availed the service of OP club and membership fee paid is non refundable; complimentary sites at Phase-XVIII of coconut groove are already allotted in favour of these complainants long back in the year 2007, since they have not deposited the site confirmation administrative charges which includes stamp duty and registration charges of Rs.1,5000/- in all, as a result OP could not register the sites allotted. Thus it is contended that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainants are not entitled for any of the reliefs claimed. <br /> <br /> The OP has produced the documents like allotment letters, conversion order of the lands, layout plan stated to have been approved by village panchayat, MOU and G.P.A in support of the defence that complimentary sites are already allotted, but the registration of the same could not be made on account of complainants failure to deposit the maintenance charges which includes stamp duty and registration charges. After going through these documents it appears to us that OP without keeping its promise of allotting sites at coconut groove at Tumkur has made the paper layout plan as if it is approved by local panchayat at a remote village like Basavanakaval of Madhugiri Taluk, Tumkur district. Allotment letters are stated to have been issued in on 20-09-2007; but there is no material to show that these letters are being received by the complainants. In the year 2007 there was no any land purchased and conversion order as conversion order is dated 13-02-2009. Without there being any land and conversion order OP through one Amrutha Estates stated to have got issued allotment letters of complimentary sites. Under these circumstances we are unable to accept the defence set up by OP that complimentary sites are already allotted in favour of the complainants. Further in the member ship application OP has shown complimentary plot at Country Club Coconut Groove. The complainants were made to believe that Country Club Coconut Groove at Tumkur. On account of the same these complainants became the members of OP club with a hope that they may get complimentary sites at Tumkur. Now the documents produced by OP reveals that Phase- XVIII of coconut groove is formed in remote village of Madhugiri Taluk of Tumkur district. Thus it becomes clear that OP has not provided the required club facilities and failed to allot complimentary sites at Tumkur. Under these circumstances we are of the view that the complainant proved deficiency in service on the part of the OP in not providing complimentary site at Tumkur and also not refunding the membership amount demanded by the complainants. OP has not replied for the legal notices got issued by these complainants. In case if the complimentary sites were already allotted as per letter dated 20-09-2007 there was no reason for OP in not replying the legal notices got issued by complainants. In the allotment letters it is shown that it is valid for period of 30 days from the date of the letter. That period of 30 days has already elapsed. OP only for the defence sake all such documents are produced just to resist the claim of the complainants. <br /> <br /> There is no merit in the contention that member ship fee paid is non-refundable. When OP has not fulfilled its obligation in providing the facilities of the club and allotting complimentary sites as promised, it is not open to contend that the complainants are not entitled for the refund of the membership fee. OP has not produced any documents to show that these complainants have enjoyed the facilities of the club. The complainants invested their hard earned money; they are unable to reap the fruits of their investment, it is all because of the hostile attitude of the OP. Under such circumstances the complainants must have naturally suffered both the mental agony and financial loss. OP having retained the said huge amount without extending the services as promised accrued wrongful gain itself thereby caused the wrongful loss to the complainants that too for no fault of theirs. Under these circumstances we are of the view that these are fit cases where in the complainants deserve certain reliefs. Accordingly we answer point No.1 & 2 and proceed to pass the following :<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaints are allowed in part. OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,18,000/- in complaint No.2285/2009 and Rs.1,15,000/- in complaint Nos.2286/2009, 2287/2009 and 2288/2009 with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of respective deposit till the date of realization with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- in each case to the complainants within four weeks from the date of communication of the order. <br /> <br /> This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.2885/2009 and a copy of it shall be placed in other respective files.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 28th day of April 2010.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> nrs <br />