In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.349/2008.
1) Rajesh Kumar,
Suite No.305A,
10A, Hospital Street, Kolkata-72. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Toshali Resorts International Ltd.
C-40 Market Building, Sahid Nagar,
Bhubaneshwar – 751007 and
8, Camac Street, Santi Niketan Building,
8th Floor, Room No.10, Kolkata-17, P.S. Gariahat. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 22 Dated 23-07-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that in December, 1995 the complainant was given an individual Timeshare Proposal (hereinafter referred to as the said proposal) from the o.p. to buy Timeshare vacation ownership from the o.p. As per the said proposal the o.p. claimed itself to be the owner of six renowned properties at Puri, Mussorie, Simla, Ranikhet, Ooty and Kadaikanal. It also proposed of expanding its network in Nainital, Manali, Jammu, Mathura, Rishikesh, Goa, Mangalore, Kovalam, Bangalore, Mysore, Nasik, Matheran, Darjeeling, Gangtok, Munnar, Lakshadeep etc. and to have a network of at least 45 completed resorts by the end of the century.
Complainant, finding the proposal to be very lucrative, accepted the proposal of the o.p. and applied for its membership on 15.12.1995. The complainant vide cheque dt.15.12.1995 bearing no.469132 drawn on the Federal Bank Ltd. in favour of the o.p. paid a sum of Rs.14,700/- as the first advance towards the allotment of a unit week. A copy of a letter dt.14.2.1996 acknowledging the said payment and intimating processing of the complainant’s enrollment.
By a letter dt.14.2.1996 the o.p. was pleased to accept the application dt.15.12.1995 of the complainant for allotment of one bedroom unit at Toshali Sands, Puri in the Ruby Season. The membership code allotted to the complainant was 80PR5130500449.
On or about 11.8.1998 an agreement was entered into between the complainant and the o.p. for allotment of one bedroom unit at Toshali Sands, Puri to the complainant on payment of Rs.73,500/-. As per the said agreement the complainant had to pay Rs.73,500/- as per the schedule given in the said agreement and the complainant has duly made payment of the said sum as per the balance payment 20.12.1996 in lieu of the balance payment.
Complainant had shifted from his previous address to the present address in Nov. 2002 and had duly intimated the said fact to the o.p. Complainant states that although in the proposal it was stated that the o.p. are the owners of 6 renowned properties, except for the resort at Puri and Simla none of the resorts are available from the o.p. through their internal network. Although the o.p. in the said proposal had proposed to have a network of at least 45 completed resorts by the end of the century, the company as on date has only two operational resort, one at Puri and Simla each.
The complainant had personally made several complaints before the customer relations officer of the o.p. at its regional office at Kolkata regarding the deficiency in service of the o.p. in providing the destinations as stated in the proposal or in expanding its network in all the places as stated in the said proposal.
The complainant by a letter dt.29.8.08 again made a representation regarding the deficiency in service of the o.p. with a request to rectify the same and in spite of due receipt of the said letter, the o.p. has failed to respond to such representation. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.p. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case and further submitted in w/v. that complainant visited various resorts and o.p. mentioned at categorically it w/v. by mentioning dates and said position has not been rebutted by the complainant. Ld. lawyer of o.p. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that in December, 1995 the complainant was given an individual Timeshare Proposal (hereinafter referred to as the said proposal) from the o.p. to buy Timeshare vacation ownership from the o.p. As per the said proposal the o.p. claimed itself to be the owner of six renowned properties at Puri, Mussorie, Simla, Ranikhet, Ooty and Kadaikanal. It also proposed of expanding its network in Nainital, Manali, Jammu, Mathura, Rishikesh, Goa, Mangalore, Kovalam, Bangalore, Mysore, Nasik, Matheran, Darjeeling, Gangtok, Munnar, Lakshadeep etc. and to have a network of at least 45 completed resorts by the end of the century.
We further find that complainant, finding the proposal to be very lucrative, accepted the proposal of the o.p. and applied for its membership on 15.12.1995. The complainant vide cheque dt.15.12.1995 bearing no.469132 drawn on the Federal Bank Ltd. in favour of the o.p. paid a sum of Rs.14,700/- as the first advance towards the allotment of a unit week. A copy of a letter dt.14.2.1996 acknowledging the said payment and intimating processing of the complainant’s enrollment.
It is seen from the record that on or about 11.8.1998 an agreement was entered into between the complainant and the o.p. for allotment of one bedroom unit at Toshali Sands, Puri to the complainant on payment of Rs.73,500/-. As per the said agreement the complaiant had to pay Rs.73,500/- as per the schedule given in the said agreement and the complainant has duly made payment of the said sum as per the balance payment 20.12.1996 in lieu of the balance payment.
It is also seen from the w/v. filed by the o.p,. that complainant visited several places as stated therein in striatum during the period from 19996 to 2000.
In view of the above findings and on perusal of entire materials on record we find that complainant has failed at substantiate and prove his case by filing cogent documentary evidence. In result, case fails.
Hence,
Ordered
That the instant case stands dismissed on contest without cost.
