Vlcc Health Care ltd. V/S K Murthy - Consumer Court Case

Karnataka

Bangalore Urban

CC/08/2320

K Murthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vlcc Health Care ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

05 Dec 2008

ORDER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSLAL FORUM, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE.
Bangalore Urban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cauvery Bhavan, 8th Floor, BWSSB Bldg., K. G. Rd., Bangalore-09.
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/2320

K Murthy						...........Appellant(s)
Vs.
Vlcc Health Care ltd.						...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

Complainant(s)/Appellant(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

COMPLAINT FILED: 30.10.2008 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 05th DECEMBER 2008 PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO. 2320/2008 COMPLAINANT Sri. K. Murthy, S/o. Surendra, Aged about 29 years, Residing at No. 22/28, 6th Street, Jamalia Puram, Perambur, Chennai 11. Advocate (A. Asha) V/s. OPPOSITE PARTY VLCC Health Care Ltd., C-7, BMP Ward 67, Near Bethany School, Ganesha Temple Road, Bangalore 560 034. Rep. by its Manager, Smt. Geetha Paul. O R D E R This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund the deposit and pay a compensation of Rs.10,10,000/- on an allegations of deficiency in service. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under: Complainant being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP, who claims to be an health care unit conducting courses for health care and body fitness opted to join the said course for slimming of his body. In that regard complainant has paid Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.04.2007 to the OP. OP accepted the same and passed the receipt. But thereafter somehow OP failed to commence the said course. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant to OP to start the said course, went in futile. Complainant patiently waited for more than 3 months then wrote a letter to OP to refund the said huge amount as they have not commenced the said course as promised, but all his efforts went in futile. Thus complainant for no fault of his, is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. He felt the deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly. 2. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were issued to the OP. Though OP is duly served with a notice, remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appears to be as bonafide and reasonable, hence OP is placed ex-parte. 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard. 4. It is the case of the complainant that he being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP, who claims to be an health care unit engaged in body fitness and slimming thought of joining the package courses floated by OP and paid Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.04.2007. OP accepted the said amount and passed the receipt No. 069. The said receipt is produced. It is further contended by the complainant that OP promised to commence the said course immediately, but thereafter somehow went on postponing the commencement of the said course. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant to start the course, went in futile. 5. Complainant patiently waited for 3 months from the date of investment of the said huge amount, but still there was no response nor course is commenced. Then he wrote a letter to OP on 18.07.2007 requesting OP to refund the said amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. The copy of the letter is produced. Again there was no response. OP having received the said huge amount, failed to conduct the said course and extend its services as promised, thereby accrued a wrongful gain to itself and caused the wrongful loss to the complainant, that too for no fault of his. The evidence of the complainant appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard his sworn testimony, which finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents. 6. The non-appearance of the OP evenafter the due service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits the allegations made by the complainant. There is a proof of unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The approach of the OP does not appears to be as very much fair and honest. Under such circumstances the complainant deserves certain relief. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from May 2007 till realization and pay a litigation cost of Rs.500/-. This order is to be complied within 4 weeks from the date of its communication. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 05th day of December 2008.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT p.n.g.

COMPLAINT FILED: 30.10.2008 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 05th DECEMBER 2008 PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NO. 2320/2008 COMPLAINANT Sri. K. Murthy, S/o. Surendra, Aged about 29 years, Residing at No. 22/28, 6th Street, Jamalia Puram, Perambur, Chennai 11. Advocate (A. Asha) V/s. OPPOSITE PARTY VLCC Health Care Ltd., C-7, BMP Ward 67, Near Bethany School, Ganesha Temple Road, Bangalore 560 034. Rep. by its Manager, Smt. Geetha Paul. O R D E R This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund the deposit and pay a compensation of Rs.10,10,000/- on an allegations of deficiency in service. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under: Complainant being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP, who claims to be an health care unit conducting courses for health care and body fitness opted to join the said course for slimming of his body. In that regard complainant has paid Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.04.2007 to the OP. OP accepted the same and passed the receipt. But thereafter somehow OP failed to commence the said course. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant to OP to start the said course, went in futile. Complainant patiently waited for more than 3 months then wrote a letter to OP to refund the said huge amount as they have not commenced the said course as promised, but all his efforts went in futile. Thus complainant for no fault of his, is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. He felt the deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly. 2. On admission and registration of the complaint, notices were issued to the OP. Though OP is duly served with a notice, remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appears to be as bonafide and reasonable, hence OP is placed ex-parte. 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard. 4. It is the case of the complainant that he being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP, who claims to be an health care unit engaged in body fitness and slimming thought of joining the package courses floated by OP and paid Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.04.2007. OP accepted the said amount and passed the receipt No. 069. The said receipt is produced. It is further contended by the complainant that OP promised to commence the said course immediately, but thereafter somehow went on postponing the commencement of the said course. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant to start the course, went in futile. 5. Complainant patiently waited for 3 months from the date of investment of the said huge amount, but still there was no response nor course is commenced. Then he wrote a letter to OP on 18.07.2007 requesting OP to refund the said amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. The copy of the letter is produced. Again there was no response. OP having received the said huge amount, failed to conduct the said course and extend its services as promised, thereby accrued a wrongful gain to itself and caused the wrongful loss to the complainant, that too for no fault of his. The evidence of the complainant appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard his sworn testimony, which finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents. 6. The non-appearance of the OP evenafter the due service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits the allegations made by the complainant. There is a proof of unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The approach of the OP does not appears to be as very much fair and honest. Under such circumstances the complainant deserves certain relief. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: O R D E R The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from May 2007 till realization and pay a litigation cost of Rs.500/-. This order is to be complied within 4 weeks from the date of its communication. (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 05th day of December 2008.) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT p.n.g.