Date of Filing:18.04.2009<br /> Date of Order:02.07.2009<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 02ND DAY OF JULY 2009<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 906 OF 2009<br /> <br /> G. Somashekaraiah<br /> S/o. Late Gangappa<br /> R/at 15/1, Pipeline<br /> Vijayanagar, Bangalore 560040 Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> <br /> The Regional Manager<br /> Country Club India Ltd.<br /> Southern Regional Office<br /> No. 870/1, 100 feet Road<br /> Adj. to Indiranagar Post Office<br /> Indiranagar, Bangalore 560038 Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> The facts of the case are that opposite party is a club. The complainant became member of the opposite party club and he has paid Rs. 1,15,000/- under receipt No. 14348 dated 28.06.2006. The opposite party committed to allot a plot at Coconut Groove. Complainant made several phone calls and enquiries about the allotment of site. But all went in vain. This clearly shows that opposite party is trying to defraud the complainant after receiving amount. This resulted in mental agony and torture. Complainant visited several times to the office of the opposite party and requested to refund the amount. Opposite party club failed to perform their part of obligation/service. Hence, it became necessary for the complainant to approach this fora for getting redressal. The complainant prayed that the opposite party be directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- with interest.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite party appeared through advocate and filed defence version stating that opposite party is a club registered under Indian Companies Act 1956. The opposite party has admitted that complainant has paid Rs. 1,15,000/- towards Mr. Card Cool Life membership. The opposite party has also admitted that opposite party has promised to give a complimentary site at Coconut Groove measuring 1089 sq.ft. and requested the complainant to pay registration fee and stamp duty. The complainant did not bother to pay the fee. Opposite party is even now ready to provide and register site. The opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and requested to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Arguments are heard.<br /> 4. The points for consideration are:<br /> 1. Whether the complainant is entitled for refund of amount?<br /> 2. Whether there was deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?<br /> 5. Perused the complaint, defence version and documents. The complainant has produced receipt dated 28.06.2006 for Rs. 1,15,000/-. The complainant has also produced letter of opposite party dated 01.04.2007. Complainant has also produced another two letters of the opposite party addressed to him. Copy of legal notice also produced wherein the complainant has demanded refund of Rs. 1,15,000/- with 18% interest. Postal acknowledgement also produced to show that notice has been served on the opposite party. Opposite party has not replied or complied the request inspite of service of notice. There is no dispute between the parties that the complainant has paid Rs. 1,15,000/- to the opposite party towards Mr. Cool Card Membership fee. During the course of argument the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant is not ready and interested to take the site and he argued that opposite party may be directed to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. The opposite party though submitted in the defence version that even now the company is ready and willing to register the site in favour of the complainant as promised, but opposite party has not produced any documents to show that sites are available and layout has been formed after complying all legal and procedural requirements. The opposite party has not produced layout plan and other documents or title deeds so that there is no legal hurdle in forming layout and allotting the sites to members. In the absence of any documentary proof of layout plan and documents the defense of the opposite party that it is ready to allot site is mere formality. Therefore, it cannot be accepted at all. The complainant is no more interested in getting the site and requested for refund of the amount. Therefore, it would be just, fair and reasonable to direct the opposite party to refund the amount to the complainant. This fora and other district Consumer Forums are allowing the complaints and directing the opposite party company in many other matters to refund the amount with interest. Therefore, this being the case of similar nature order to refund the amount can be passed. The respective forums are awarding interest on the amount, since the opposite party has utilised the amount it is bound to pay the interest to the complainant. In the result I proceed to pass the following:<br /> ORDER<br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs. 1,15,000/- to the complainant along with 12% interest p.a. on that amount from 28.06.2006 till payment / realisation within 30 days from the date of this order.<br /> 7. The complainant is also entitled for Rs. 1,000/- as costs of the present proceedings from the opposite parties.<br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 02ND DAY OF JULY 2009. <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings.<br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br />