Punjab

Sangrur

CC/1272/2021

Rajesh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Signature The Grand Club - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Amit Aggarwal

31 Jan 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                        Complaint No. 1272

 Instituted on:   22.10.2021

                                                                        Decided on:     31.01.2023

 

1. Rajesh Kumar son of Sh. Sham Lal;

2.     Vibha Gupta wife of Sh. Rajesh Kumar, both residents of Mohalla Ranbir Ashtabal, Patiala Gate, Opposite Government Girls School, Sangrur.

                                                          …. Complainant.     

                                                 Versus

Signature The Grand Club, Signature Linkers Private Limited, Registered and Head Office: K-28, 2^nd Floor, Lajpat Nagar-II, New Delhi-110024 through its Managing Director.

             ….Opposite party 

For the complainant:             : Shri Amit Aggarwal, Adv.              

For the OP                          : Shri Saurav Garg, Adv.

 

Quorum                                           

Jot Naranjan Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

Kanwaljeet Singh, Member

 

 

 

ORDER

SARITA GARG, MEMBER.

1.             Complainants have filed this complaint (referred to as complainant in short) against the opposite party pleading that the complainant is a consumer of the OP by obtaining the club membership for 10 years for 1 BR (covering 4 adults + 2 kids) by paying the total amount of Rs.1,70,000/- and the OP offered them a special sale promotion scheme for ten years (consisting of all seasons for 6 nights 7 days stay) in 1 BR in 5 star hotel with free breakfast and dinners, free pickup and drop, sight seeing for staying anywhere in India or abroad per year for 6 nights/7 days for member and his/her spouse alongwith two children. Further the OP also offered to provide extra six nights/7 days with four return air tickets and all meals anywhere in India.  Further case of complainant is that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- on 14.10.2017 i.e. Rs.85,000/- was paid in cash and the remaining amount of Rs.85,000/- was paid by way of cheque to the opposite party.  Further case of the complainant is that membership number AVN10025676 was allotted to the complainant. Further case of the complainant is that when the complainant received their e-profile, the same was not found upto the mark, as such the complainant requested the OPs to refund the so deposited amount of Rs.1,70,000/- with the OP, but the OP refused to do so and instead of refunding the amount, the OP extended the period of membership for two years i.e. 10 years to 12 years and offered to refund an amount of Rs.50,000/-, which was accordingly refunded to the complainant. 

2.             Further case of complainant is that he approached the OP through email on 16.11.2017 and requested to book/resort/villa in Rajasthan (Bikaner, Jaisalmer, Udaipur) from 24.12.2017 to 30.12.2017, but the OP refused to book the same saying that the same is not available.  Further in the month of January, 2018, OP demanded one time AMC including utility charges of Rs.11,000/-, which was not disclosed by the OP at the time of issuing the allotment. Thereafter the OP demanded Rs.12,980/- as AMC for each years 2019, 2020 and 2021 and when the complainant objected, then the OP threatened to forfeit the so deposited amount.

3.             It is further averred that the complainant went to Signature Manali resort at Manali and Signature Resort at Jim Corbett at the suggestion of the OP, but the staff of Jim Corbett was rude and the head office had to intervene the complainant were given booking of family suits from 9.11.2019 to 12.11.2019. It is further averred that in the month of December, 2020, the complainant wanted to go to Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh, but the OP denied the booking.  Thereafter the complainant requested the OP  to visit Chail (Himachal Pradesh) from 19.7.2021 to 21.7.2021 and visited there by paying Rs.21,000/- to the hotel for the happiness of their children.   It is stated further that the representation given by the Op was totally wrong and without any basis, as such, the complainant requested the OP to refund the so deposited amount of Rs.1,20,000/- plus Rs.49,940/-, but they failed to return the same.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant has prayed that the Opposite party be directed to refund the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- plus Rs.49,940/- plus Rs.2100/- as utility charge,to refund an amount of Rs.71,000/- paid by the complainant on account of hotel bookings and further to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, tension and harassment and further to pay Rs.22,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

4.             In reply filed by the OP, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint is totally misconceived and not maintainable, that the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands and that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. On merits,  it has been denied that the complainant was invited as guest to join the anniversary/sale promotion scheme of the OP  and providing of free voucher for three nights/four days for two adults and two children has also been denied. It has been denied that the OP offered the complainant sale promotion scheme for 10 years at the cost of Rs.1,70,000/- consisting of all seasons for six nights 7 as. Further it has been stated that the OP had issued booking form bearing number 7024 and 7025 dated 14.10.2017 with the terms and conditions. The OP has also denied that it had received Rs.1,70,000/- from the OP. However, it is stated that at the time of executing the agreement dated 14.10.2017, the complainant had fully understood the terms and conditions of the agreement. It has been denied that the OP ever charged the AMC charges. The other allegations leveled in the complaint have also been denied.

5.             The learned counsel for the parties produced their respective evidence.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued vehemently that the complainant is a consumer of the OP by obtaining the club membership for 10 years for 1 BR (covering 4 adults + 2 kids) by paying the total amount of Rs.1,70,000/- and the OP offered them a special sale promotion scheme for ten years (consisting of all seasons for 6 nights 7 days stay) in 1 BR in 5 star hotel with free breakfast and dinners, free pickup and drop, sight seeing for staying anywhere in India or abroad per year for 6 nights/7 days for member and his/her spouse alongwith two children. Further the learned counsel has contended that the OP also offered to provide extra six nights/seven days with four return air tickets and all meals anywhere in India.  Further case of complainant is that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- on 14.10.2017 i.e. Rs.85,000/- was paid in cash and the remaining amount of Rs.85,000/- was paid by way of cheque to the opposite party.  Further the learned counsel has contended that membership number AVN10025676 was allotted to the complainant. Further case of the complainant is that when the complainant received their e-profile, the same was not found upto the mark, as such the complainant requested the OPs to refund the so deposited amount of Rs.1,70,000/- with the OP, but the OP refused to do so and instead of refunding the amount, the OP extended the period of membership for two years i.e. 10 years to 12 years and offered to refund an amount of Rs.50,000/-, which was accordingly refunded to the complainant.  On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP has denied all the allegations of the complainant and has prayed further for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

7.             Ex.C-2 is the copy of welcome letter issued by the OP and Ex.C-3 is the copy of payment receipt of Rs.5000/-. Ex.C-33 is the copy of membership application and approval form which clearly reveals that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- in total i.e. Rs.85,000/- in cash and Rs.85000/- by way of cheque bearing number 002998, whereas the OP has denied the receipt of the total payment. Ex.C-9 is the copy of letter dated 27.10.2017 whereby the OP offered to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant.  It is worth mentioning here that the amount of Rs.50,000/- has already been refunded to the complainant vide two cheques of Rs.25,000/- each dated 14.10.2017, meaning thereby the OP kept the remaining amount of Rs.1,20,000/- without any rhyme and reason as the OP did not provide any service. Ex.C-18 is the copy of email dated 18.2.2021 sent by the OP wherein it has been stated that the OP has not any property for the destination the complainant desires to visit. Ex.C-8 to Ex.C-27 are the copies of emails exchanged between the complainant and the OP. Ex.C-28 is the copy of receipt showing payment of Rs.12980/- to the OP by the complainant.  On the other hand, the OP has not produced any cogent and reliable evidence to show that the OP ever offered the services to the complainant for which they had charged the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- from the complainant.  In the circumstances of the case, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OP and are of the considered view that the OP is duty bound to return/refund the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- plus Rs.12,980/- to the complainant.

8.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct OP to refund/pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- plus Rs.12,980/-  alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from the date of deposit till realization. We further direct OP to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment and an amount of Rs.5000/- as  litigation expenses. 

9.             The complaint could not be decided within the statutory time period due to heavy pendency of cases.

10.            This order of ours be complied with within a period of sixty days of its communication. A certified copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned to records.

Pronounced.

                        January 31, 2022.