Date of Filing:27/09/2014
Date of Order:02/06/2016
BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE - 27.
Dated: 2nd DAY OF JUNE 2016
PRESENT
SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, B.SC., B.Ed.,LL.B.,PRESIDENT
SRI.H.JANARDHAN,B.A.L, LL.B., MEMBER
SMT.BHARATI.B.VIBHUTE, B.E(I.P.) LL.B., MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO:1696/2014
Kumara Subramanya,
No.301, Shikharam Apartment,
Varthur Main Road,
Munnekolala,
Bangalore-560 037. Complainant
V/s
M/s. Country Club India Ltd.,
No.55/1 (Basement),
Devarabeesanahalli,
Marathahalli-Sarjapur Ring Road,
Varthur Hobli,
Bangalore-560 037. Opposite Party
ORDER
BY SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT
1. This is the complaint filed in person U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred in short as O.P) alleging deficiency in service and praying for direction to the O.P to register the site property situated at Coconut Groove Phase IX, near Tumkur and to get the khatha for the allotted site No.98 with a dimension 1089 Sq. ft or alternatively seeking refund of the amount of Rs.1,15,000/- along with compensation of Rs.75,000/- and also prays for Rs.10,000/- towards cost of the proceedings.
2. The brief facts of the complaint is that, the O.P offered the complainant a scheme consisting of membership of country club and also offered to give complementary site with a dimension 1089 Sq ft against the taking of the membership with the Op. Accordingly complainant obtained the membership from the Op by paying the amount of Rs. 1,15,000.- on 18.09.2006. After obtaining the membership that, the Op on 28-12-2006 allotted the complimentary site property that is site No 98 with a dimension of 1089 sq ft at coconut groove layout near Tumkur. When the complainant approached the Op for registration and informed that, the land is yet to be taken possession and converted for sites. Further, the complainant was informed by the Op that they will provide the required site at penugonda, Andrapradesh. Hence the complainant demanded the Op to provide the site as promised at coconut groove near Tumkur, failing which refund the amount of Rs.1,15,000/- along with interest at 18 % per annum. However the OP. given the replied that, the membership amount cannot be refunded. Hence this complaint..
3. Upon issuance of notice, O.P appeared through their counsel and filed its version. In the version it is contended that, complaint is false, frivolous and filed the same by suppressing the material facts. The O.p. company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 and pioneered in making the clubs and resorts accessible to the common people. Further O.p. admitted that they introduced a scheme viz., Mr. Cool Card members in that scheme would get the following facilities to the customer/consumer of O.P. Company as under:-
i. Country club cool life membership.
ii. Complementary plot.
iii. Holiday package of two nights three days stay in Bandipur, Bush Betta.
iv. Three days two nights in country club De-goa with one way Air ticket of couple and even food and pick up and drop is taken care
v. Access to all the clubs in India and other facilities.
vi. Non refundable membership fee in this scheme is Rs.1,15,000/-
4. The O.P. contended that, the complainant having learnt about the facilities and benefits provided under the said scheme and the complainant made a payment of Rs.1,15,000/- towards membership fees through cheque. Thereafter the O.P. issued a membership card bearing No.COOL CG 3971 to the complainant. O.P. admitted that, they are ready to allot the complimentary plot at Vedic spa, Penugonda, Pandiparthy Village, Ananthapuram District. The complainant has paid Rs.1,000/- out of Rs.25,000/- for registration of plot and the balance amount of Rs.24,000/- to be paid towards the registration of complimentary plot. The O.p is ready to execute gift deed in respect of complimentary site in favour of the complainant on payment of balance of Rs.24,000/- towards registration charges and AMC charges. On 28.05.2011 the O.p. had given a paper publication in Deccan Herald and Prajavaani regarding the allotment and registration of the complimentary sites to its members who have not got their plots registered are requested to contact M/s Amrutha Estates & Hospitality Pvt. Ltd.
5. O.P. further contended that, the complainant being the member and enjoyed the facilities provided in the clubs and resorts. Hence it is contended that, allotment of complimentary plot was an additional attraction for taking up membership but not an intrinsic part of the contract for which the complainant made payment. The complainant has no right to get redressal under the C.P.Act, 1986. On other grounds O.p. prays for dismissal of the complaint.
6. To substantiate the above case, the complainant and both O.P have filed their respective affidavit evidence along with documents. We have heard the arguments.
7. On the basis of pleadings of the complainant, the following points will arise for our considerations are:-
(A) Whether the complainant has proved
deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?
(B) Whether the complainant is entitled to the
relief prayed for in the complaint?
(C) What order?
8. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT (A) & (B): In the negative.
POINT (C): As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
POINT (A) & (B):-
9. On perusing the pleadings of the parties and the available evidence on record, it is not in dispute that, the complainant had obtained the membership from the O.p on 28-12-2006 by paying an amount of Rs.1,15,000/- to the O.P. Further it is not in dispute that the O.Ps also offered complementary site to the members of the club. It is also not dispute initially the free complementary site propose to allot to the members near coconut garden at Tumkur and due to reasons, the O.P offering free complementary site near Penagonda at Andrapradesh. Hence it leads to filing of this complaint.
10. It is worth to note that, the complainant did not alleged about the deficiency in service in making use of other facilities as offered by the O.P for club membership. However, the complainant was promised to give complementary site initially at near Tumkur. When the required complementary site is not allotted and when the O.P was offered to allot the site at Penagonda, if the complainant did not want to continue the membership he ought to have cancelled it during the free look period or within the two years of the membership. After enjoying the membership for a long time the complainant cannot turn round and claim the refund of the membership amount. On the basis of evidence on record the complainant was obtained the life membership with a complementary site and hence it is the option left to the complainant either to receive the complementary site at Penagonda by paying the registration charges. However, the complainant is not entitled for the refund of the amount as sought in the complaint.
11. On going through entire evidence on record, we found that complainant is failed to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. Hence the complainant has not entitled for any relief’s as claimed in the complaint. Accordingly, we answered the point No.(A) and (B) in the negative.
POINT (C):
12. Based on the findings given on the point No.(A) and (B) and in the result we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
- The complaint is dismissed. No order as to cost.
- Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 2nd Day of June 2016)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
*Rak
