Haryana

Panchkula

CC/472/2019

DR.D.K KAPIL. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S 50 FOCH CLUB. - Opp.Party(s)

Y.P SHARMA.

18 May 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA

                                                       

Consumer Complaint No	:	472 of 2019
Date of Institution	:	22.08.2019
Date of Decision	:	18.05.2022

 

Dr. D.K.Kapil, S/o Sh.Rala Ram, resident of H.No.179, Sector-21, Panchkula, Tehsil and District Panchkula.

                                                                ….Complainant.

 

Versus

1.     M/s 50 Foch Club, SCO  120, Top Floor, Sector-25, Panchkula,   through its Proprietor/Partner/Authorised Signatory.

2.     Jaspreet Authorsied Signatory, M/s 50 Foch Club, SCO 120, Top         Floor,  Sector-25, Panhkula.                                                                                                                                 ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.

 

Before:              Sh.Satpal, President.

Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr.Sushma Garg, Member.

 

For the Parties:   Sh. Y.P.Sharma, Advocate for the complainant.

                        None for OP No.1 (Defence of OP No.1 struck off vide order dated 20.04.2021).

                        None for OP No.2 (Defence of OP No.2 struck off vide order dated 02.03.2020).

ORDER

(Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member)

1.                The brief facts of the present complaint are that the complainant after seeing the advertisement for the Gym being run by Ops, approached its representative and was assured that the OPs are providing all types of facilities to their members in their Gym, which include facility of Jacuzzi, Spa, Treadmil, refreshment meal etc. The complainant assuming the statement of OPs to be correct became their member and deposited a fee of Rs.2,300/- vide receipt no.196 dated 08.07.2019 for the period from 08.07.2019 to 08.10.2019 with OP No.2. After visiting the Gym on 08.07.2019, complainant was not able to find the assured facilities in the Gym of OPs. On asking for the availability of said assured facilities, representative of OPs said that the same will be added shortly in the GYM and asked complainant to start with other available machines but the complainant refused to continue without the facilities. The OPs have committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Due to the acts and conduct of the OPs, the complainant has suffered a great mental agony, harassment and financial loss. Hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notices, the OP No.1 has appeared in person to contest the complaint; but he did not file the written statement despite availing several opportunities including the last opportunity; therefore, the defence of OP No.1 was struck off by this Commission, vide its order dated 20.04.2021. 

                The OP No.2 has appeared in person to contest the complaint; but he/she did not file the written statement despite availing several opportunities including the last opportunity; therefore, the defence of OP No.2 was struck off by this Commission, vide its order dated 02.03.2020. 

3.             To prove the case, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered his affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-4 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement.

4.             We have heard the ld. counsel for the complainant and gone through the entire record available on the file, minutely and carefully.

5.             During arguments, the learned counsel reiterated the averments made in the complaint and prayed for acceptance of the complaint by directing to OPs to refund the amount alongwith interest @24% per annum.

6.             Evidently, a sum of Rs.2,300/- was paid by the complainant as per Annexure C-4 to the OPs for availing the Gym facilities, which included facility of Jacuzzi, Spa, Treadmil, refreshment meal etc. w.e.f. 08.07.2019 to 08.10.2019. As per complainant, the assured facilities like Jacuzzi, Spa, Treadmil, refreshment meal etc. were not provided in the Gym of OPs and thus, a legal notice (Annexure C-1) was sent by the complainant through his counsel on 23.07.2019 to the OPs asking for the refund of the paid amount of Rs.2,300/- alongwith  interest,  but the same failed to invoke any positive response from OPs.

7.             On the other hand, it is found that Sh. Vivek, Prop, of OP No.1 appeared in person on 16.01.2020 and sought the adjournment for filing written statements. The case was adjourned to 17.02.2020. On 17.02.2020, none has appeared and case was adjourned to 02.03.2020 for filing written statement. On 02.03.2020, Sh. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate appeared on behalf of the OP No.1 but did not file the written statement and as such, the case was adjourned to 01.04.2020 for filing written statement subject to the payment of Rs.500/- as cost to the complainant. Thereafter, the case was adjourned several times but none has appeared on behalf of the OP No.1 and another cost of Rs.500/- was imposed to be paid by OP No.1 to the complainant and ultimately, the defence of OP No.1 was struck off vide order dated 20.04.2021 as neither the written statement was filed nor the cost of Rs. 500/- was paid to the complainant and further the cost of Rs.500/- was also not deposited in the Haryana State Council for Child Welfare.

8.             The defence of the OP No.2 was struck off vide order dated 02.03.2020 as neither the written statement was filed within the statutory period nor anyone appeared in the case after 16.01.2020; thus, the OPs No.1 & 2 have failed to rebut the allegations made by complainant even after putting appearance in the case.  Therefore, the assertions made by complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.

9.             Since, there is no defence version on behalf of the OPs rebutting and contorverting the contentions of the complainant, we have no option except to accept the version of the complainant and thus, conclude that there has been lapse and deficiency on the part of the OPs No.1 & 2; hence, the complainant is entitled to relief.

10.    As a sequel to the above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OPs No.1 & 2:-

1. To refund a sum of Rs.2,300/- along with interest @ 9% per annum to the complainant w.e.f. the date of filing of this complaint till realization
2. To pay a lump sum amount of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and litigation expenses.

 

11.            The OPs No.1 & 2 shall comply with the directions/order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order to OPs No.1 & 2 failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No.1 & 2. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance. 

Announced on: 18.05.2022

 

 

                Dr.Sushma Garg         Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini         Satpal

                    Member                  Member                           President

 

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

                                        Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini

                                                Member