Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/527/2020

Yuvraj Singh Aulakh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Athelonics Gym - Opp.Party(s)

Manjot Singh Rai Adv

09 Jul 2021

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.

:

527/ 2020

Date of Institution

:

12.10.2020

Date of Decision    

:

09.07.2021

 

                                       

                                               

Yuvraj Singh Aulakh aged 28 years son of Harinder Singh Aulakh r/o H.No.320, Sector 35, Chandigarh.

                                ...  Complainant.

Versus

Athelonics Gym through its Owner/Manger, SCO 146-148, Sector 43, Chandigarh, email address:

…. Opposite Party

BEFORE:

SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

SHRI B.M.SHARMA, MEMBER

 

Argued by

                Sh.Manjot Singh Rai, Adv. for the complainant

                OP exparte.

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

  1.         By dint of this common order, we propose to dispose of the following five (5) connected consumer complaints in which common questions of law and fact are involved:-

1

2

3

4

Sr.

No.

C.C. No.

Parties Name

Amount  deposited (In Rs.)

  1.  

527/2020

Yuvraj Singh Aulakh Vs. Athelonics Gym

11,500/-

  1.  

528/2020

Inderpal Singh Vs. Athelonics Gym

11,500/

  1.  

532/2020

Gurjeet Singh Walia Vs. Athelonics Gym

11,500/

  1.  

533/2020

Shavinder Kaur Sandhu Vs. Athelonics Gym

11,500/

  1.  

534/2020

Manjot Singh Rai Vs. Athelonics Gym

11,500/

  1.         The facts are gathered from Consumer Complaint No.527/2020- Yuvraj Singh Aulakh Vs. Athelonics Gym.
  2.           The facts of the case as alleged by the complainant are that the OP is in the business of providing gym and related services. He subscribed for the membership of the OP-Gym for a period of one year, commencing from 29.01.2020 for an amount of Rs.12,500/-, which was paid in installments and cash as mutually agreed  between the parties except Rs.1000/- as the same was to be paid after completion of three months of the membership. The confirmation of the receipt of the membership fee was given through SMS (Annexure C-1). The complainant was allotted membership No.4202.  It has further been averred that he informed the OP many times that the equipment was faulty and some were not even working but the same were not got repaired/replaced.  Subsequently, on 23.03.2020 due to wide spread pandemic of Covid-19, a nationwide lockdown was imposed and the gym remained closed till 04.08.2020. It has further been averred that when the gyms were opened, he went to the OP to inquire as to what adjustment was to be provided for which the gym remained closed then he was informed that they are discussing the matter with the management.  On 12.08.2020, the OP informed the offer through SMS (Annexure C-2) in which the OP advertised that upon renewal of the membership 50% of the lockdown period was to be compensated meaning thereby that if the complainant renews his membership which had 6 months remaining at that time for another 12 months only then he was to get 2 months compensation of the period for which he was charged without providing any services.  It has further been averred that in the last week of August, 2020 he again went to the OP to enquire about the period of 4 months for which the gym remained closed and he was informed that the same was to be deducted from their membership period.  It has further been averred that the complainant informed the OP that he paid the huge amount of the membership fee out of his savings and he would be put to great loss if the same is not compensated but the OP repudiated his reasoning on the ground that they had to pay the rent of the showroom because of which they were entitled to charge fee of the services of four months for which they did not provide any facility and they told the complainant to take renewal offer to get 50% compensation.  Finally, he got served a legal notice dated 24.09.2020 through his counsel upon the OP but to no effect. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OP amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.   
  3.         Notice sent for the service of the Opposite Party through process server was received back with the report of refusal. Since refusal was good service, and none appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party on the date fixed, therefore vide order dated 07.06.2021, it was proceeded against exparte. 
  4.         We have heard the learned Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the documents on record.
  5.         Admittedly, due to Covid-19 pandemic, the lockdown was enforced all over the country on the evening of 24.03.2020 by the Government of India as a preventive measure and to curb the spread of Corona virus due to which the gym of the OP remained closed till 04.08.2020 and even this fact has been admitted by the complainant in the complaint himself.
  6.          Needless to mention here that  the country is still reeling under the threats of covid-19 pandemic and its spread has not yet been controlled, thereby causing threats to life due to which lockdowns of varying stringency have been placed by the UT/State Governments from time to time to curb the spread of Corona virus. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that the OP has committed any sort of deficiency in service or indulged into unfair trade practice by not rendering the promised services to the complainant, during that period.  As such, the complainant(s) is/are not entitled for refund of the membership fee as prayed for.
  7.         Further the complainant has not been able to place on record any documentary evidence in the shape of whatapps message/complaint/letter/email, if any, written to the OP to show that he ever made any complaint to the OP regarding the faulty equipments and, therefore, this plea of the complainant is rejected accordingly.
  8.         However, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case(s), we are of the considered view that the ends of justice would be met if the complaints are disposed of with a direction to the OP to render the services to the complainant(s) for the remaining period of 4 months as and when the restrictions imposed by the Government/Authorities are lifted and the gym of the OP become fully operational. We order accordingly.
  9.         In view of the above discussions, the complaints are disposed of as stated above with no order as to costs.
  10.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

09.07.2021.                                                          

Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(B.M.SHARMA)

MEMBER

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.