PRESENT

                    Complainant by Adv. Smt. Parera present.   

                   Opponent  by Representative Adv. Prasad Apte present.           

ORDER

(Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President.)                          

1)        The complainant have filed the complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against Country Club (India) Ltd which is company registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956 having a common seal and perpetual succession

2) The brief fact of  averrements   made by Complainant,  may be stated as under.

a)   The Opposite party contacted complainant informing that complainant won a lucky draw on the basis of form filled by complainant’s son in a mall where a lucky draw was taken and complainant were entitled for seven days package tour.

b)  The complainant alleged that opponent induced them for obtaining membership of a club and offered to allot about 3000 sq. ft. plot near village kolad Dist. Raigad. The opponent assured for construction of  a building a holiday resort i.e. kolad Golf village to be  constructed and plot will be allotted adjacent to the  building,

c)   According to complainant,  opposite party arranged visit to the spot at kolad. The complainants  agreed to become member as N. A. Plot was allotted to them. They paid Rs. 3,35,000/- ( three lakh thirty five thousand) and agreement was entered on 30/5/2008, allotting  a plot no 411 at kolad Golf  village and seven days free vacation.

d)  The Opposite party agreed to register the agreement within eighteen months  and directed to complainant to pay Rs. 6000/- per year as maintenance charges  from the date of membership. The complainant again paid Rs. 6000/- on 20/8/2008 towards administrative charges.

e)    The Complainant repeatedly requested opponent party for allotment but there was no positive response. The notice was issued to opponent on 10/3/2010 demanding the refund of amount due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, of opponent the amount Rs. 347000/- ( Rs. Three Lakh forty seven Thousand with interest

3.       The opposite party filed written statement and resisted the claim stating that complaint is not maintainable. The said complainant is filed only to harass opponent as there is no case of action to file the same.

4)      The opponent party contended that complainants  became  member of the club after full understanding of the term and conditions.   It is alleged, this forum has  no jurisdiction,  as opposite party has place of office at Hydrabad.  

5.       The opposite party alleged,  that allotment of plot was subject to policy of govt. The said  facility  was in the form of conditional gift and is free with zero consideration on the basis of compliment. The complainants have   no rights to claim the said plot as of right.

6.       The opposite party averred that company made application for N.A. permission for allotment of plot and  is  pending before Revenue Authority. It is contended that company is willing to give plot at any other location on fulfillment of other conditions.

7.       The opposite party alleged that the complainants have no right to claim refund of the amount.

8.       The parties have filed on record documents in support of their contentions and also filed affidavits well as written notes of argument.

9.       The main grievance of complainant is that opposite party induced them to take the membership assuring that one plot admeasuring 3000 sq. ft. will be allotted  to  them. To understand the origin of agreement, we have to consider the contents of the complaint, wherein it is specifically mentioned that complainants son had filled form in a mall and on the basis of the same the opposite party met complainants that they are entitled  for 7 days tour on the basis of lucky draw. The said fact is not specifically denied by the opposite party.

10.     The fact that the complainant paid Rs. 300000/- for the flat can be inferred that allotment letter is appended with the complaint. The opponent has not denied the allotment of plot. The main issue is whether the plot was complementary or not. We hold that as the plot was allotted on accepting amount the complainants are entitle for the same as of right.

11.     We are convinced that complainants accepted membership of country club on the basis of assurance of plot for which substantial amount for consideration is paid. The denial of the plot on the ground that the plot was given as a conditional gift or govt. policy is not acceptable. The failure to handover the possession of plot amounts to deficiency in service and stating that the plot was complementary is unfair trade practice.

12.     The opponent is under an obligation to refund the total amount received from complainants with interest. There is no justifiable reason to deny the claim of complainants which is just and reasonable.

13.     We pass the following order.

ORDER

1.      RBT Complaint No. 205/2011  is partly allowed.

2.       The opponent is ordered to pay Rs. 347000/- ( Rupees three lakh forty seven thousand ) to the complainants with interest at the rate

          of 18% from the date of filling of a complaint.

3.No order as to cost.

4.      Copy of this order be sent to both parties.