Useful Information Customer Care Address Popular Judgments
FAQ Consumer Forum Reliance Karnataka Country Club Bajaj Allianz State Bank Of India
Court Fee Airtel Chandigarh Idea ICICI Lombord Andhra Bank
Where to file Complaint Vodafon Bengal Tata Indicom HDFC Standard Life HDFC Bank
Notice Sample Idea Uttarakhand Airtel IffcoTokio Icici Bank
First Appeal Consumer Forum BSNL Gujarat Reliance Metlife Punjab National Bank
Consumer Protection Act Nokia Rajasthan Vodafone SBI Life Insurance Bank Of India
RTI for Banks Micromax Assam Mobile Store Reliance General Insurance Canara Bank
Insurance Ombudsman Lava Uttar Pradesh MTNL New India Insurance Bank Of Baroda
Banking Ombudsman Karbonn Jharkhand Birla Sun Life National Insurance United India Insurance
How to start DND Sony Bihar LIC Oriental Insurance State Bank Mysore
Irctc TATA AIG India Bank


+ Submit Your Complaint
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Country Club (india)

  1. #1
    admin is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,015

    Default Country Club (india)

    ORDER


    BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN) 07th MARCH 2009 PRESENT:- SRI.A.M.BENNUR PRESIDENT SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER COMPLAINT NOs. 227/2009, 255/2009 256/2009, 257/2009, 258/2009, 268/2009 & 281/2009. COMPLAINT


    NO.227/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.255/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.256/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.257/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.258/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT NO.268/2009COMPLAINANTCOMPLAINT

    NO.281/2009

    COMPLAINANT Sri.M.R.Krishna Murthy,Residing at No.85, 1st Floor,2nd Cross, Central Excise Layout, Vijayanagar,Bangalore – 40.(Advocate – Sri.S.Nagaraja)Mrs.Elizabeth Nicholas,W/o Felix Nicholas,Aged about 46 years,R/at No.12,Old Pearl Nursery Street,21st Cross, Behind Chavra Church,Ejipura,Bangalore – 560 047.Mrs.Deena Pereira,W/o Lawrence A.Pereira,Aged about 31 years,R/at No.10, 4th A Cross,Maruthinagar,Srinivas Temple Road,Madiwala Extension,Bangalore – 560 068.Mr.Prakash Anil Mendonca,S/o Alex Mendonca,Aged about 29 years,R/at No.16, 4th ‘B’ Cross,“Shree Maruthi Nilaya,Shree Venkateshwara Temple Road,Maruthi Nagar, Madiwala, Bangalore – 560 068.Mr.Munish Biddappa,R/at TF 302, Classic Calisto,Opp:Abhaya Reddy Layout,Kagadasapura Main Road,C.V.Raman Nagar Post,Bangalore – 560 075.Advocate – Sri.Kiran MurgodMr.Shridhar Prabhu,# 158, I Floor, II Main, III Cross, Near Bata Showroom,Chamarajapet,Bangalore – 560 018.Sri.K.M.Ram Prasad,Aged about 62 years,S/o K.Mallaiah,Residing at No.168,13th Main Road,Coffee Board Layout,Kebbal Kempapura,Bangalore – 560024.Advocate – Sri.H.S.Manjunath(Complaint No.281/2009)


    OPPOSITE PARTIES V/s1) Chairman & Managing Director, Country Club (India) Ltd.,No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main,Indira Nagar, 1st Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.2) The Manager,Amrutha Estates,No.478, “Maha Padma”,1st Main, 1st Stage,Indira Nagar,Bangalore – 560 038.3) M/s. Country Club India Ltd.,R/by its Managing Director,# 273, 1st Main Road,Defence Colony, HAL 2nd Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.Also atM/s. Country Club (India) Ltd.,Regd. Office at “Amrutha Castle”, 5-9-16,Opp. Secretariat Saifabad, Hyderabad – 560 063.4) M/s. Country Club (India) Ltd.,(A Company under the Companies Act, 1956)No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main,Indiranagar, 1st Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.Represented by itsManaging DirectorMr.Y.Rajeev Reddy.5) The Managing Director,M/s. Country Club (I) Ltd.,# 750, Brindavan,Ground Floor,Krishna Temple Road,Near Sapna Book Stores,Indiranagar 1st Stage,Bangalore – 560 038.Advocate – Sri.S.M.Manjunatha


    O R D E R These are the complaints filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by each one these respective complainants, seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to refund what ever the amount they have paid and pay a compensation and damages on an allegations of deficiency in service. As the opposite parties in all the complaints are common, the question involved, relief claimed being the same, in the interest of justice, in order to avoid the repetition of facts and multiciplity of reasoning, these cases stand disposed of by this common order. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaints, are as under:


    2. Complainants being lured away with the advertisement and propa@@@@a issued by the OP thought of becoming the member of the club under various schemes. OP accepted their membership and collected the fees not only that OP has collected the monthly subscription fees also. OP promised so many attractive offers like ‘Royal Goan Beach Club’ stay for 6 nights and 7 days, insurance coverage, wildlife resort stay etc. But thereafter some how OP failed to keep up its promise. For no fault of theirs complainants were made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. OP having retained the said huge amount accrued the wrongful gain to self and caused wrongful loss to the complainants in not providing the basic facilities and the services as promised. Under such circumstances complainants felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. For the convenience sake the card membership, amount paid, membership number, date of legal notice noted below in the chart. When the repeated requests and demands made by the complainants have gone in vain they are advised to file these complaints and sought for the reliefs accordingly. Sl No. Complaint No. Card member ship Amount paid Member ship No. Legal Notice 1) 227/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,15,000/- COOL CG2355 31.12.2008 2) 255/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,15,000/- COOL CG2311 20.09.2008 3) 256/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,15,000/- COOL CG2314 20.09.2008 4) 257/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,15,000/- COOL CG2312 20.09.2008 5) 258/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,15,000/- COOL CG4454 22.10.2008 6) 268/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.1,25,000/- COOL CG619A --------------- 7) 281/2009 Mr.Cool Card Member ship Rs.99,000/- COOL CG483 10.01.2009 2. On appearance, OP filed the version. The defence set out by the OP in all the complaints is almost identical and same. The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the version is as under: According to OP the club membership fee that is paid by each one of these complainants is non refundable. It is further contended that the OP’s are ready to execute the deed with respect to the complimentary sites in favour of the complainants as soon as complainants pay the registration and other miscellaneous charges as required. Each one of these complainants have extensively used the club facilities. The other allegations made by the complainants are all false and frivolous. Complaints are devoid of merits. There is no proof of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence OP is not liable to pay the compensation nor obliged to refund the fees. Among these grounds, OP prayed for dismissal of the complaints.


    3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, each one of these complainants have filed their affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence. Then the arguments were heard.



    4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in these complaints are as under: Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant’s have Proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OP? Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant’s are entitled for the relief’s now claimed? Point No. 3 :- To what Order?


    5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on: Point No.1:- In Affirmative Point No.2:- Affirmative in part Point No.3:- As per final Order.

    R E A S O N S


    6. At the out set it is not at dispute that each one of these complainants become the member of the OP scheme as noted in the chart. OP accepted their membership and allotted them certain number. It is also not at dispute that OP collected the membership fees as well as service charges as noted in the chart from each one of these complainants. Now the main grievance of the complainants is that though OP collected the service charges failed to provide the facilities as promised.


    7. According to the complainants in complaint Nos.255/2009, 256/2009, 257/2009, 258/2009 and 268/2009 OP promised them to provide stay at ‘Royal Goan Beach club’ for 6 nights and 7days, free air ticket to Goa and stay at wildlife resort, ‘BUSH BETTA’ and other facilities. In spite of their repeated requests and demands OP failed to extend the said service as promised. The evidence of the complainant’s which finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents appears to be very much natural, cogent and consistent. There is nothing to discard their sworn testimony. It is a quality of evidence that is more important than that of the quantity.


    8. When OP failed to heed to their demand complainants even caused the legal notice on 20.09.2008, 22.10.2008, 31.12.2008 and 10.01.2009. Copies of the legal notice, postal acknowledgements are produced. Again there was no response. Hence complainants felt deficiency in service. As against this unimpeachable evidence of the complainants the defence set out by the OP appears to be defence for defence sake just to shirk their responsibility and obligation. The defence of the OP that what ever the club membership fees paid is non refundable has no basis.


    9. It is further contended by the OP that even now it is ready to execute the sale deed with respect to the complimentary sites if complainants pay required registration fees and stamp duty. No where complainants have sought for allotment of a complimentary site in their favour and registration of the same. So this defence of the OP is very strange.



    10. OP is not very much sure about its own defence. No where OP has stated that it provided ‘Royal Goan Beach Club’ stay, insurance coverage, wildlife resort stay as contended by the complainants. So when there is no specific denial of the said allegations, in our view it amounts to an admission. Though OP received such a huge amount from each one of these complainants but failed to provide the said facilities as promised thereby accrued the wrongful gain to self and caused wrongful loss to the complainant that too for no fault of theirs. Here we find the deficiency in service.


    11. The approach of the OP does not appear to be as very much fair and honest. Though complainants invested their hard earned money they are unable to reap the fruits of their investment. Under such circumstances they are entitled for certain relief. Of course the claim of compensation by these complaints appears to be exorbitant and high. There is no basis for the said claim. Having taken note of the facts and circumstances of the case in our view justice will be met by directing the OP to refund what ever the amount it has received from the complainants towards membership along with token of compensation and litigation cost. With these observations we answer point Nos.1 & 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following:

    O R D E R

    The complaints are allowed in part.
    1. In complaint No.227/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from May 2006 till realization along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
    2. In complaint No.255/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- and pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
    3. In complaint No.256/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- and pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
    4. In complaint No.257/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- and pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.

    5. In complaint No.258/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,15,000/- and pay a compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
    6. In complaint No.268/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.1,25,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from June 2007 till realization along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant.
    7. In complaint No.281/2009 OP is directed to refund Rs.99,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from November 2007 till realization along with litigation cost of Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication. This original order shall be kept in the file of the complaint No.227/2009 and a copy of it shall be placed in other respective files.

  2. #2
    admin is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,015

    Default

    Date of Filing:22.12.2008
    Date of Order : 20.03.2009
    BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20
    Dated: 20th DAY OF MARCH 2009
    PRESENT

    Sri. Bajentri H.M, B.A, LL.B., President
    Smt.C.V. Rajamma, B.Sc., LL.B., PGDPR, Member


    COMPLAINT NO. 2769 OF 2008

    Sunitha G.Nair,
    W/o Madhusudhan R.
    R*at Anugraha, I Cross,
    B.Narayanapuram Main Road,
    Whitefield Road,
    Bangalore – 560 079.
    …. Complainant.
    V/s

    01. Country Club(India) Limited,
    No.675, 9th ‘A’ Main, Indiranagar,
    I Stage, Bangalore – 560 038.
    Reptd by its Administrative Officer.

    02. Amrutha Estates,
    A Division of Country Club,
    No.478, Maha Padma,
    I Main, I Stage, Indiranagar,
    Bangalore – 560 038.
    …. Opposite Parties

    -: ORDER:-


    This complaint is for a direction to the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs.2,45,000/- with interest at 12% Per Annum from the date of complaint till the realization.


    2. The case of the complainant is as under:-
    Believing the false assurances of the Opposite Party No.1, the complainant entered into an oral agreement in October 2006 to become Mr.COOL Privilege Card member. At that time, the Opposite Party No.1 demanded Rs.1,15,000/- towards membership fee as per the letter dated:06.10.2006. The complainant paid that amount on various dates and the payment has been acknowledged by Opposite Party No.1 on various dates. Opposite Party No.1 promoted and developed a new innovative concept of giving vacant site at reasonable rate/complementary sites to the members in association with Opposite Party No.2 by the letter dated:09.01.2008, the Opposite Party No.2 allotted a complementary free site to the complainant at XIV-Site No.117 measuring 1633 sq.ft. and demanded Rs.20,000/- towards site confirmation, administrative charges, stamp paper fees and registration expenses including maintenance charges for a period of 30 months. The complainant paid that amount of Rs.20,000/- by cheque and the same is reflected in the statement of accounts of ICICI Bank dated:17.12.2008. Thus, the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.1,35,000/- to the Opposite Parties. But the Opposite Parties neither registered the site in her name nor handed over the possession of the same. In the letter dated:24.09.2006 the Opposite Party No.1 has stated that the registration will be done 25 days after completion of full payment. But the Opposite Parties have not bothered to fulfill their promise and thereby committed deficiency of service. Even now the Opposite Parties have been promising that the site would be registered soon after layout is formed, but the same has remained only as promise. As a result, the complainant has lost interest and faith in the Opposite Parties and decided to cancel the membership. The Opposite Parties are also liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony, loss and inconvenience caused. Thus, she is entitled to claim refund of Rs.1,35,000/- paid, damages of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-, in all Rs.2,45,000/- from the Opposite Parties. Hence, the complaint.


    3.In the version, the contention of the Opposite Parties is as under:-
    At no point of time they have rendered deficient service and therefore the question of claiming compensation does not arise. They have issued advertisement about the benefits of becoming a member of their club. After going through the advertisement, the complainant fixed up an appointment with the Opposite Parties to know more bout the offers. Accordingly one of the executive of the Opposite Party met the complainant and explained about the various schemes. Being impressed with the scheme and the offers, the complainant expressed her willingness to become member with the Opposite Party by paying non-refundable sum of Rs.1,15,000/- towards the membership fee to become Mr.COOL LIFE MEMBERSHIP and availed all the benefits. The complainant was offered with free site and the allotment letter was also sent. It was clearly stated in the letter that the payment should be made within 30 days, but the complainant did not bother to pay the registration fee within the time. She paid the amount in March-2007 towards stamp duty charges and other charges. Even now they are ready to allot the site as offered under the scheme. The payment for refund is made after utilizing all the facilities and complementary benefits. Therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.


    4.In support of her claim, the complainant has filed her affidavit and has produced copies of documents. In spite of sufficient time granted, the Opposite Parties failed to adduce evidence. When the matter came up for arguments, the Opposite Parties and their counsel remained absent. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant.


    5. The points for consideration:-
    1.Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
    2.Whether the complainant entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?


    6.Our findings are:-
    Point No.1 : In the Affirmative
    Point No.2 : As per final order
    for the following:-
    -:REASONS:-



    7. The fact that the complainant has paid Rs.1,15,000/- towards membership fee to become Mr.COOL LIFE MEMBER and that she has also paid Rs.20,000/- towards registration and other charges is admitted. The fact that the complainant is entitled for allotment of free/complementary site and at some point of time, Opposite Party No.2 had also allotted a site in favour of the complainant is admitted. The only contention of the Opposite Parties is that, the payment of Rs.20,000/- towards registration and other charges was not made within the stipulated time. Therefore the site was not registered in the name of the complainant. In the letter dated:24.09.2006 one of the offer made by the Opposite Party to the complainant is regarding allotment of free site of 1634 Sq.ft. for the ICICI Credit Card Holders. It is also stated in this letter that registration will be done 25 days after completion of full payment and registration charges will be paid by the member. By the letter dated:27.11.2006, the Opposite Party No.2 informed the complainant that she has been allotted complementary free site on Phase-XIV – Site No.117 (Site 1633 Sq.Ft.). By the said letter, the complainant was also requested to pay Rs.20,000/- towards Stamp Paper Fees, registration expenses and maintenance charges for a period of 30 months and that the letter of allotment is valid for a period of 30 days from the date of the letter and in case of delay in making payment of the charges within the said period, the complementary plot number allotted will be changed to a different Phase and on receipt of the payment she would be informed about the registration process and further course of action. In the letter of allotment dated:27.11.2006 the only condition imposed for getting the site registered is that, Rs.20,000/- shall be paid towards registration expenses within 30 days from the date of the letter and in case of delay the allotment will be changed to a different phase. Therefore it is not as if the delay in payment of registration and other charges demanded in the allotment letter dated:27.11.2006 will disentitle a member for allotment of the site itself. In case of delay, the Opposite Party is entitled to change the allotment of site to a different phase. No material is produced by the Opposite Parties to show that on account of delay in payment of Rs.20,000/-, the allotment in favour of the complainant was changed to a different phase subsequent to 27.11.2006. From the Bank statement produced by the complainant, the payment of Rs.20,000/- to Opposite Party No.2 on 22.02.2007 is reflected. Therefore, though the complainant paid the entire amount towards membership fee and the amount towards registration and other expenses as demanded, as long back as in February – 2007, the Opposite Parties have failed to execute sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of the site allotted nor they have informed the complainant that the site is changed to some other phase. Alleging deficiency in service, the complaint is filed on 22.12.2008. Thus, for nearly two years after payment of Rs.20,000/- towards registration and other expenses, the Opposite Parties maintained silence and did not perform the promise made by them. This omission on the part of the Opposite Parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service.



    8.In the version, the Opposite Parties have clearly stated that even now they are ready to allot the site in favour of the complainant. In view of this admission on the part of the Opposite Parties, it becomes necessary to direct the Opposite Parties to execute registered sale deed in favour of the complainant in respect of the site allotted in the letter dated:27.11.2006 or in respect of any other site of similar dimension. In case the Opposite Party failed to execute sale deed, the complainant becomes entitled to seek refund of the amount paid. In the result, we pass the following:-
    -:ORDER:-

    • The complaint is ALLOWED.
    • The Opposite Parties are directed to execute registered sale deed in respect of the site allotted in favour of the complainant as per allotment letter dated:27.11.2006. Compliance of this order shall be made within eight weeks from the date of the order. In case for any reason, the Opposite Parties failed to execute registered sale deed, Opposite Party No.1 shall refund the sum of Rs.1,15,000/- and Opposite Party No.2 shall refund Rs.20,000/- to the complainant together with interest thereon at 12% Per Annum from the date of respective deposits till the date of payment and shall also pay costs of Rs.2,000/-. Compliance of refund of the amount shall be made within one month after the expiry of first two months from the date of the order.
    • Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs immediately.
    • Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 20th DAY OF MARCH 2009.

    Sd/- Sd/-
    MEMBER PRESIDENT

+ Submit Your Complaint

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 08-26-2014, 06:21 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-01-2014, 09:23 PM
  3. Country Club of India
    By mbskrishnan in forum Product And Services
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-13-2010, 01:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •