BEFORE THE BANGALORE URBAN III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE–560027.

DATED THIS THE 26^th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.1229/2019

PRESENT:

Sri.K.S.Bilagi, B.com, M.A., LL.M.….  PRESIDENT

Smt.L.Mamatha, B.A., (Law), LL.B.….     MEMBER

Sri. M.B. Seena, B.A., (Law), LL.B.….       MEMBER

COMPLAINANT:

Mrs.Rufina Rajesh,

W/o Anthony Rajesh,

Aged about 37 years,

R/at No.1340,

(Rep. by Sri.V.Sathish, Advocate)

V/s

OPPOSITE PARTY

The Kolors Health Care,

World’s 1^st ISO 9001-2000 Company,

5AC-718, HRBR Layout,

Rep by Manager.

(Rep. by Sri.C.M.Dhananjaya and Associates, Advocate)

Written by SMT.L.MAMATHA, MEMBER

******

//ORDER//

1. This complaint has been filed under Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 to direct the Opposite Party to refund a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- and Rs.20,000/- spent for hospital along with Bank interest to the Complainant and Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony, damages and cost of the Complainant.  

2. The case of the Complainant in brief is as under:-

The Opposite Party is a Service Provider for weight loss without any side effects in the name and style of Kolors Health Care.As per Opposite Party’s assurance and guaranty, the Complainant with intent to reduce the weight loss had joined Opposite Party Company and became customer by paying Rs.500/- on 19.02.2019 and paid sum of Rs.1,19,500/- on 20.02.2019 and opted for 148 classes.The Complainant has taken 6 to 7 classes where she got blisters on her body and was very bad back pain and itching and pain in legs.Due to the side effect, the Complainant was forced to take treatment at Bangalore, Baptist Hospital.After examination, doctor advised her to stop weight loss programme.Hence, the Complainant stopped the programme.The Complainant spent Rs.20,000/- for the side effect treatment.Immediately, the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party for refund the amount.On 14.05.2019 Complainant got issued legal notice. On 21.05.2019 the Opposite Party sent reply notice denying all the allegations.The Complainant submits that Opposite Party avoided legal liability.The Opposite Party breached the promise and caused deficiency of service.Hence this complaint.

3. After receipt of notice, the Opposite Party appeared and filed version.  In the version, the Opposite Party denies all the allegations of the Complainant and admits that the Complainant joined Opposite Party Company and became customer and opted for 148 classes.   But the details of payment mentioned in the para not admitted.  It is not true that she got blisters on her body and back pain itching and pain in legs and she was forced to take treatment at Bengaluru, Baptist Hospital and spent Rs.20,000/-.  The Opposite Party submits that Opposite Party is an ISO certified entity and it is serving the people to the utmost satisfaction of its customers.   The doctors and the staff working in the unit are experienced and dedicated personnel.  There is absolutely no side effects in the treatment.  Many customers have expressed their full satisfaction about the treatment and the hospitality being provided at the centre.  It is the Complainant who has not strictly adhered to the schedule of treatment and diet.  The Complainant has to blame herself for the fault of her own.  At the time of admission, she has agreed to all the terms and conditions of the centre and under the terms and conditions, the Complainant is not entitled to any refund at all.  The claim made by the Complainant is absolutely baseless and not at all maintainable.  Hence, the Opposite Party requests this Commission to dismiss the complaint with costs.

4. The Complainant files affidavit evidence and relies on the documents.  Affidavit evidence of Assistant Operation Manager of Opposite Party has been filed and document produced.  Heard the arguments of the Complainant only and perused the records.
5. The points that arise for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves that there was deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party ?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitle to the reliefs claimed in the complaint ?
3. What order?

6. Our findings on the above points are:-

1. Point No.1       :- In the Negative
2. Point No.2       :- In the Negative
3. Point No.3       :- As per final order

for the following;

:REASONS:

7. POINT NO.1 & 2:- On perusing the pleadings along with documents produced by the Complainant, it reveals that the Opposite Party is a service provider for weight loss.  The Complainant joined Opposite Party Company to reduce the weight and paid total Rs.1,20,000/- and opted for 148 classes.  It is the duty of the Complainant to prove all the contentions.  There is no law that once the Complainant is admitted, the Complainant need not prove her contention.  It is settled proposition of law that the person who approaches the Court/Authority must prove her case and she is not supposed to take weakness or otherwise of the other side. 

8. The Complaint has been filed by Complainant stating that she joined the course being run by Opposite Party Kolors Health Care by paying in all Rs.1,20,000/-.  We carefully perused the documents produced by the Complainant and Opposite Party.  EX.P1 & EX.P2 are the receipts.  It does not bear the signature of either Complainant or any official of Opposite Party.  EX.R1 produced by Opposite Party i.e., slimming record book.  This book pertains to weight loss program. On the date of admission on 20.02.2019 Complainant’s weight was 108.8 kgs.  EX.R1 indicates that the Complainant availed service of weight loss from Opposite Party.   The Complainant has taken only 6 to 7 classes out of 148 classes, she discontinued the course.  The Complainant send legal notice on 14.05.2019.  On 21.05.2019 Opposite Party sent reply notice denying all the allegations.

9. The Opposite Party produced the documents which is marked as EX.R1.  There is no fault or deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party.  There is no side effect in the treatment.  It is the Complainant who has not strictly adhered to the schedule treatment and diet.  At the time of admission, she agreed the terms and conditions of the centre.   

10. The Complainant alleges deficiency of service of Opposite Party.   There is no single document to prove the deficiency.  Eventhough, the Complainant produced EX.P1 and EX.P2, EX.P6, which do not help the Complainant to prove the deficiency of service by Opposite Party.   On perusing EX.R1, it clearly indicates that Complainant agreed the terms and conditions of the Opposite Party centre.  The terms and conditions bears the signature of the Complainant.  Therefore, the Complainant is not right in saying that there is deficiency of service on the Opposite Party.  When there is no deficiency of service towards Complainant, the Complainant is not entitled to any reliefs.  Therefore, Complainant is not entitled to any reliefs.     
11. POINT No. 3:- For the reasons stated in the preceding paragraphs, the Complainant is not entitled to any reliefs. The complaint requires to be dismissed.  We  proceed to pass the following final order;
12.  

The complaint is dismissed without cost.

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties and return extra copies of the pleading and evidence to the Complainant.

 (Dictated to the Steno, typed by her, transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced by the open Forum on 26^th day of FEBRUARY 2021)

    (L.Mamatha)              (M.B.Seena)                  (K.S.Bilagi)

       MEMBER                  MEMBER                    PRESIDENT

//ANNEXURE//

Witness examined for the complainant side:

Smt.Rufina Rajesh, who being the Complainant has filed her affidavit.

List of documents filed by the complainant:

1. Two printed receipts issued by Opposite Party.
2. Certificate dt.14.03.2019 issued by Dr.S.Raghupathy of Bangalore Baptist Hospital.
3. Copy of the legal notice dt.14.05.2019 got issued by Complainant to the Opposite Party.
4. Reply notice dt.21.05.2019 got issued by the Opposite Party through their advocate.
5. The pamphlets Nos.3 carrying advertisement by the Opposite Party.

Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:

Sri.Ramesh R.O, Assistant Operations Manager of the Opposite Party has filed his affidavit.

List of documents filed by the Opposite party:

1.The attested copy of slimming record book maintained in the establishment of Opposite Party.

(L.Mamatha)                    (M.B.Seena)                 (K.S.Bilagi)

  MEMBER                         MEMBER                  PRESIDENT