Order-35.
Date-18/04/2018.
Smt. Sangita Paul, Member.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainants by filing this case state that being persuaded by the rosy pictures, drawn by the authorized representatives of the OPs, they availed of their services upon payment of consideration money to purchase Points Rights of the Country Vacations International Holiday Club and agreement dated March 15, 2012 was executed by and between them and the OPs thus become their user. Complainants state that a person attached to the office of the OP2 rang complainant1 thereby informing him that he and his wife have been selected for a prize of country club and they were requested to be present at City Centre, Salt Lake. OP showed them a rosy picture about travel concession/Accommodation/Airfare Discount/Health Club throughout India and insisted them to sign the agreement. Complainant in good faith signed the agreement. The OPs through their authorized representatives realized Rs.1,30,000/- only from them on due acknowledgement Receipts. In addition to the initial agreement dated March 15, 2012, a supplementary agreement was also executed. It was signed and sealed by Sri Rahul Gupta, authorized representative of the OPs. In addition to Rs.1,30,000/- only Maintenance charge at the rate ofRs.8000/- for 1st year and at the rate ofRs.6,000/- for second year amounting to Rs.1,44,000/- (Rupees one lakh forty four thousand only). Complainants, for several times enquired about the availability of accommodation in different parts of India, but they were always told that the place for which they were enquiring was already booked. As a result, they never availed of the accommodation and/or other facilities of country club which they are legally entitled to. They came to knew that many consumers were deprived of the services of the OPs complainants, on several occasions verbally requested the OP2 to give them proper service, but the OPs did not deliver proper service. Complainants sent demand notice vide their Ld. Advocate on March 1, 2016, they have received it on or before March 03, 2016 is still continuing. Complainants submit that the OPs refused to render service in accordance with law, which tantamounts to deficiency in service. Complainants were not able to avail of services after due payment of consideration money. Complainants also submit that unless orders are made as prayed for, they shall suffer irreparable loss injury and shall be severally prejudiced.
Complainants pray for directing the OPs to refund Rs.1,44,000/- along with 18 percent interest p.a. on and from cause of action till its actual realization, directing the OPs to pay compensation of Rs.5 lakhs for harassment, mental agony to complainants, also directing the OP, to pay litigation cost and other miscellaneous costs of Rs.2,00,000/-, complainants also pray for directing payment of interest at the rate of9 percent p.a. to be calculated on the entire accrual amount due to credit of complainants till its full realization.
The OPs in their written version state that the complaint petition is vindictive, motivated, harassing and mis-conceived. The complaint petition does not disclose any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs so as to be adjudicated by consumer court.
OPs state that complainant is not a consumer in terms of C.P. Act, 1986 and it is also evident from the complaint filed before Ld. Forum. The definition of deficiency as defined in C.P. Act, 1986 does not cover the claims arising under the present dispute. The instant complaint is barred by limitation and thus liable to be dismissed. OPs state that complainants are well educated and well articulated individuals. It is not a reasonable amount while making serious transactions both in professional and personal spheres. Statements made by complainant are false and fabricated. According to the principle of ‘caveat Emptor’ that the buyer must act in a reasonable way while paying such an amount for product/service. No part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of Ld. Forum.
The OPs state that complainants were sufficiently explained, by means of audio visual of the company’s website, agreement – presentations as well as printed brochures and other means about the membership schemes/services/product offered by the OPs after going through the schemes, complainants bought one of the membership’s schemes.
OPs state that complainants paid requisite charges for Membership (Blue Category Membership). They signed the membership agreement. After signing the complainants received membership card and hit complainants.
The OPs state that the complainants never asked for any service to the Ops so no question of providing service arises by making this complaint petition, complainants have committed gross abuse of judicial process. Complainants are liable to pay outstanding amount in respect of AMC to the OPs. So, it is clear that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and the complaint may be dismissed.
Decision with Reasons
We have perused complaint petition, written version newspaper cutting, letter addressed to complainant by the OP, letter addressed to the OP by complainants, contract form, photocopy of money receipts, photocopy of work sheets and other documents lying on record. It is evident that complainants received a phone call from the OP1 and he and his wife went to the office of Salt Lake, OP2 allured complainants by showing attractive pictures of several beautiful places and insisted complainants to sign the agreement and complainants paid Rs.1,30,000/- for International Holiday Club and Hospitality agreement. OPs gave them receipts. In addition to the above payment, complainants also paid Rs.8,000/- only as maintenance charge for the first year and Rs.6,000/- for second year. Altogether complainants paid Rs.1,44,000/- only. Complainants enquired for availability of accommodation on different parts of India. But every time, complainants were refused by the officials of country vacations. OPs informed complainants that those places were already booked. In this way, they never availed of any accommodation for which they paid the lump sum amount of Rs.1,30,000/- and Rs.14,000/-. Complainants are deprived of getting services after paying the charge. In this way the OPs are duping the public by not giving an opportunity of travelling. After giving this charge complainants are deprived of getting the facilities for some unknown reasons best known to the OPs themselves. OPs are reluctant to give service. They did not give opportunity to complainants but complainants made payments of Rs.1,44,000/- only. Thus the OPs are guilty of unfair trade practice. The misdeed of the OPs are known to the newspaper. In a newspaper report dated 17-02-2015 published on Anandabazar Patrika it was published that the personnel of country vacation duped public by taking money and giving false hopes. One detective reported that the country vacations tell public that they would make arrangements for staying at five star resorts, after picking up some persons, they show the persons pictures of big resorts all over India and abroad. Everything was displayed in attractive manner. Persons get attracted by the officers’ sweet behavior and attractive displays. According to police, if the customers express their willingness to go for an outing at a particular place, country vacation shows them several excuses. If anybody is willing to go to Kalimpong, the country vacations would insist them to go to Ooti. The train or Airfare has to be borne by the party. Police reports that if anybody reports to police, country vacations refund their money. Thus they escape from the intervention of police. But their act of duping people is still continuing. In this case, the OPs must refund money of complainants. OPs told the case is hopelessly barred by limitation. But it appears that aggrieved complainants wrote letter to the OP and oPs also answered the letter. So, it is clear that cause of action is continuing. Ops preferred a revision to Hon’ble State Commission, but the same is dismissed. OP also preferred an appeal to the Hon’ble NCDRC, but could not bring the stay orders. It appears that neither Hon’ble National Commission nor Hon’ble State Commission entertained the OPs. The OPs are guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. So, complainant is entitled to get relief.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs.10,000/-.
OPs are directed to refund Rs.1,44,000/- with 9 percent interest to the complainants from March 03, 2016 till compliance of the order. It is to be complied within one month from the date of this order.
OPs are further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- for unfair trade practice to be paid to this Forum within the stipulated period.
Failure to comply with the order will entitle complainants to put the order into execution u/s.27 of C.P. Act, 1986.
