Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/267/2018

Vijay Aggarwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

VLCC Health Care Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Rajesh Verma

11 Nov 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/267/2018
Date of Institution	:	11/06/2018
Date of Decision	:	11/11/2021

 

Vijay Aggarwal R/o H.No.203, Sector-6, Panchkula (Haryana).

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. VLCC Health Care Ltd. SCO 43, First Floor, Pocket No.1, Manimajra, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director.
2. VLCC Health Care Ltd. SCO 43, First Floor, Pocket No.1, Manimajra, Chandigarh, through its Managing Director/Authorized Person.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	RAJAN DEWAN	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Rajesh Verma, Counsel for complainant.
	:	Sh.Varun Kumar Mittal, Counsel for OPs.

Per Surjeet kaur, Member

1.      Briefly stated the allegations are that the complainant took the program (A)+(B) and paid advance for the program in the month of March 2015 amounting to Rs.50,000/-. The Opposite Parties confirmed the reduction of 5kg weight and 4 inch loss of tummy circumference within one month, Brochures and advertisements of their program guarantee is annexed as Annexure C-1. The complainant wrote email dated 10.03.2015 regarding the meeting/discussion which is annexed as Annexure C-2. As per the program which were obtained by the complainant neither any progress nor the results as guaranteed as by the OPs. The complainant visited OPs 30 times approximately for the sittings as detailed by the OPs, but there is no result and so the complainant talked to the OPs. Copy of email is annexed as Annexure C-4. The complainant informed the OPs, that he has undertaken 30 sessions after 16.12.2016, but there is no progress on weight loss and the complainant could manage 1Kg of loss caused by diet control only. The patience of the complainant had ended, the complainant asked for refund of the amount. Copy of the email dated 16.02.2017 is annexed as Annexure C-11.

         In order to allure the complainant he was shown an imported costly machine through which the treatment would be done and the complainant was induced fraudulently to take up the program and money back guarantee and the complainant paid another amount of Rs.28,000/- again on 31.03.2017. But there is no improvement in the weight loss and inch reduction.  The complainant’s legal notice was sent through email dated 03.08.2017, which is annexed as Annexure C-16. Payments detailed are annexed as Annexure C-20 & C-21. Hence, this present consumer complaint.

2.     OPs contested the consumer complaint. The complainant had approached them for weight loss on 09.03.2015. The complainant was satisfied with their services therefore, the complainant purchased a new treatment for slimming and weight loss on 14.01.2016 and again on 28.01.2016 and 25.02.2016. As per OPs if the complainant had any issue with any of the services availed from them then he would have not purchased other plans. The complainant’s another plan for weight loss and the treatment was commenced by the OPs. As per the program record, the complainant had to come present on regular basis for the treatment and had to continue strict diet for desired results. But the complainant neither remained regular for the treatment nor followed his diet as per the terms of the treatment. The complainant was being provided appropriate treatment but after one sitting, the complainant came for further treatment then due to uncontrolled diet the weight of the complainant was increased whereas it should be reduced. It was only unhealthy and uncontrolled diet that’s why the treatment was not resulting into desired consequences. The copy of treatment chart is annexed as Annexure OP-2.

         Therefore the complaint again purchased another plan of slim sonic and tummy trim 5 units each for an amount of Rs.24,999/- on 31.03.2017 is annexed as Annexure OP-3. The complainant was suggested by the OPs representative on various occasions to continue with strict diet of the treatment but the complainant many times used to avoid the suggestions of the OPs. Therefore, the complaint deserves to be dismissed.

3.     Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
6.     It is evident from Annexure C-1 that the complainant was allured by the attractive advertisement that “loose 4 Kg in 30 days or take your money back”. Annexure C-2 to C-19 there are various email communications exchanged between the complainant and the OPs regarding allegations made in the complaint for weight reduction and inch loss of tummy program. As per Annexure C-20 and C-21 the complainant paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- on 05.04.2015 and again Rs.25,500/- on 31.03.2017 respectively. The sole grouse of the complainant is that despite paying huge amount Rs.75,500/- he did not get the desired result as promised by the OPs. As per the case of the complainant, he attended about 60 sessions as suggested by the OPs in their program and followed the strict diet schedule as well, but the same could not yield results as promised by the OPs.
7.     The stand taken by the OPs is that it was only for the complainant to follow the proper diet schedule but he chose not to be regular. Hence, due to uncontrolled diet the weight of the complainant was increased, whereas it should be reduced. As per the contentions of the OPs it was only unhealthy and uncontrolled diet of the complainant which did not result into desired consequences. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on their part.
8.     It is admitted fact that the complainant hired service of the OPs since 2015 and again the complainant paid more amount of Rs.25,500/- even after 2 years that is evident from Annexure C-21. We are of the opinion, that anyone who takes the services of the any dietician/weight loss consultant he or she will certainly wish for the desired/promised results. But in the present case OPs charged an additional amount of Rs.25,500/- with assurances as per Annexure C-1 to give promised results in form of loss of 4 Kg weight in 30 days and in case of failing to refund the money. But in last 2 years there was no desirable results and it was the clever attitude of the OPs which again allured the complainant to pay more amount saying that an imported costly machine has been purchased by them through which the treatment will be done and smartly again sold another program with money back guarantee for Rs.25,500/- as is evident from Annexure C-21.
9.     It is admission by the OPs in their reply that instead of decrease in the weight there was increase in the same. But it has been alleged that it was only complainant who did not follow the diet schedule strictly which resulted into the increase of the weight and not as desired or as promised.
10.     We are of the opinion that when no desirable results were achieved after selling the 1^st Plan to the complainant and the OPs were very much sure of the careless attitude of the complainant of not following the diet scheduled strictly to attain desirable results then there was no occasion to sell another additional program to complainant to grab more money from him instead of refunding the previous amount as promised in Annexure C-1. Hence we opine that the act of the OPs for not providing proper services shatter the trust of other consumers also. Moreover the OPs have not given any sufficient reply to the contention of the complainant that he attended 60 days sessions without any fruitful results. Hence the act of OPs for not providing proper services in form of expected/desired results as weight reduction, wasting precious time and energy of the complainant by forcing him to indulge in the present unnecessary litigation by non-refunding the amount paid as guaranteed proves deficiency in service.
11.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OPs are directed as under :-

1. to refund ₹75,500/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the respective date of deposits till realization.
2. to pay an amount of ₹20,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

12.     This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
13.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
11/11/2021	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Rajan Dewan]
Ls	Member	Member	President