Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Through this Appeal, the Appellant, M/s Vibes Alankar Sliming & Clinic Pvt. Ltd. assailed the decision of the Ld. District Forum to allow the complaint case.

Brief facts of the complaint case are that the Respondent visited the Appellant’s centre with an intention to reduce his weight and paid due charges.  Allegedly, on the very first day of undergoing ‘body wrap heat treatment’, he fell very sick.  Subsequently, on the basis of the assurance given by the Appellant, the Respondent again visited the said centre after few days and underwent the training session.  However, allegedly, this time too, he felt unwell.  Therefore, out of disguise, he asked for refund of the entire amount being paid by him.  His request in this regard being not considered favourably, the Respondent filed the complaint case.  The counter case of the Appellant was that, out of his own volition, the Respondent rescued himself from the scheduled training programme after taking three sittings and so, he did not deserve any refund.

We have heard the parties and gone through the material on record.

As it appears, the Respondent is a known diabetic and HTN patient and the Appellant was well aware of such medical condition of the Respondent.  

It was incumbent on the part of the Appellant to judge/assess the body fitness/capability of the Respondent properly before inducting/allowing him to undergo the specific weight loss programme. While the Respondent was deeply concerned and keen to reduce his body weight, unless felt extreme discomfort, there was no apparent reason for him to abruptly withdraw from the said weight loss course being charted out by the Appellant. 

It also appears that initially the Respondent opted for size zero programme and paid due charges accordingly.  However, on being told that the Respondent would not be able to visit Appellant’s centre everyday, his package was changed to ‘slim zone’.  Subsequently, when the Respondent experienced serious health hazards after undergoing training, he was advised to switch over to another package on the ground that ‘slim zone’ package was not suitable for diabetic/HTN patients. 

Lastly, though the Respondent cast serious doubt about the qualification of the trainers, it appears, Appellant has not produced any documentary proof to refute such charges.

Considering all aspects, we, therefore, refrain from interfering with the impugned order save and except exonerating the Appellant from the liability of payment of lump sum compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- in view of the fact that the Ld. District Forum allowed both compensation and interest which is not permissible in law.  The Appeal, accordingly, stands allowed in part.