COMPLAINT FILED: 25.08.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> 30th SEPTEMBER 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO. 1863/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sqn. Ldr. Captain Bhagawandas,<br /> S/o. Hari Das,<br /> Aged about 66 years,<br /> Occ: Business,<br /> Residing at No. 196/2, 2nd Main,<br /> Anantha Ramaiah Compound,<br /> Mysore Road,<br /> Bangalore – 560 018.<br /> <br /> Advocate (S.V. Prakash)<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTY M/s. Vacation Club International Golden Palms Hotel & Spa,<br /> Off. Tumkur Road,<br /> Bangalore – 562 123.<br /> Represented by its <br /> Branch Manager.<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant to direct the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/- and for such other reliefs on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> Complainant being lured away with the advertisement issued by the OP, who offered to provide the international club facility became the member on 21.11.2007 and paid Rs.10,000/-. OP promised to send the membership card on or before 25.11.2007. In the meantime on enquiry complainant came to know that the facilities going to be offered by OP are not to his satisfaction. Then he immediately contacted the OP and sought for the refund of Rs.10,000/- within a span of one week, there was no response. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant, went in futile. For no fault of his, he is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. Under the circumstances he felt the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. As such he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On admission and registration of the complaint, notice was sent to the OP. Though OP was duly served with a notice, remained absent without any sufficient reason or cause. The absence of the OP does not appears to be as bonafide and reasonable, hence OP is placed ex-parte.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed his affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP did not participate in the proceedings. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. It is the case of the complainant that he being lured away with the advertisement and propaganda issued by the OP executives with regard to the facilities and amenities they are going to offer on becoming the member of their club, thought of enrolling himself as a member of OP club on 21.11.2007. In that regard he paid Rs.10,000/-. OP acknowledged the receipt of the same. OP promised to deliver the membership club card within 3 days, but failed to do so. In the mean time complainant came to know that the facilities going to be offered are not up to his satisfaction. Then within one week he contacted the OP and sought for cancellation of his membership and refund of Rs.10,000/-.<br /> <br /> 5. Complainant has produced the membership application form, the receipt for having paid Rs.10,000/- and the repeated correspondence made with the OP seeking refund of the said amount. The evidence of the complainant finds full corroboration with the contents of the undisputed documents. There is nothing to discard his sworn testimony. It is a quality of evidence that is more important than that of the quantity. The non-appearance of the OP evenafter the due service of the notice leads us to draw an inference that OP admits all the allegations made by the complainant. <br /> <br /> 6. Though complainant invested his hard earned money, he is unable to reap the fruits of his investment. When complainant expressed his unwillingness to continue as a member of the OP club, it would have been more fair on the part of the OP to refund the said Rs.10,000/- collected towards the membership, but failed to do so. Thereby OP accrued the wrongful gain to itself and caused the wrongful loss to the complainant, that too for no fault of his. Here we find the deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 7. In view of the discussions made by us in the above said paras, we find it is a fit case wherein the complainant deserves certain relief. Accordingly we proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to refund Rs.10,000/- together with interest at the rate of 10% p.a. from 25.11.2007 till realization and pay a litigation cost of Rs.500/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within 4 weeks from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 30th day of September 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> p.n.g. <br />