w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Country Vacations, International Holiday Club, Hyderabad, Rep. by its General Manager & Another v/s K. Chandrahasa Alva & Another

    First Appeal No. 47 of 2013

    Decided On, 10 December 2021

    At, Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bangalore

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI SHANKAR
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI
    By, MEMBER

    For the Appellants: B. Keshava Murthy, Advocate. For the Respondents: Nataraj Ballal, Advocate.



Judgment Text

Sunita Channabasappa Bagewadi, Member

1. The appellants/Opposite Parties have preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.13.10.2012 passed in CC.No.29/2012 on the file of Dakshina Kannada District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mangalore.

2. The brief facts of the complaint are hereunder;

It is the case of the complainants that the Opposite Parties approached the complainants and offered them to become a member of Country Vacations for a period of 30 years by paying 1,60,000/- and enjoy all the benefits of the club and the complainants became the members for Country Club Life for lifetime and need not have to pay any annual maintenance charges to the club. Further the complainants entitled for complimentary accommodation for self and spouse for a period of 14 days in a year and also stated they can surrender the membership after one year if they desire and the company will refund the entire amount of Rs.1,60,000/- immediately. The complainants further submit that they had gone to Goa during September 2010, during the stay there was no discount on food items and there is no response inspite of telephone reminders. Again in March 2011 the complainants decided to go Bush Betta in Bandipura, though the Opposite Party confirmed the booking they have asked the complainants to pay taxes on account of the guests who accompanied them in advance. Due to the unsatisfactory service of the Opposite Parties, the complainant issued a demand notice dt.12.04.2011 for cancellation of the membership and asked for refund of the entire amount paid, but, the Opposite Parties failed to refund the same. Hence, the complaint.

3. After service of notice, the Opposite Party No.1 did not appeared, hence, the District Commission placed them exparte. Opposite Party No.2 appeared before the District Commission and filed version. The Opposite Party No.2 contended that as per the Purchase Agreement the complainants have to pay administrative charges of Rs.6,000/- annually on 1st November each year. It is further contended that the membership fees is non-refundable and is not a deposit towards the membership and is accepted subject to the terms and conditions and stated that Rs.1,60,000/- paid by the complainants is non-refundable. The Clause No.18 of the Purchase Agreement states that members have to pay for the facilities used by every guest. The guest charges will be determined by the Management from time to time. Hence, the said clause very specifically states the members have to pay for the facilities used by every guest. The Opposite Party denied the deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant and contended that the subject matter involved is purely based on the terms and conditions of the agreement, hence, there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4. After trial, the District Commission allowed the complaint and aggrieved by the said Order, the appellants/Opposite Parties are in appeal. Heard the arguments.

5. Perused the appeal memo, Order passed by the District Commission and materials on record, it is an admitted fact that the respondents have paid Rs.1,60,000/- to the appellants and became members of Country Vacations for a period of 30 years and also became members for Country Club Life for lifetime and did not have pay any annual maintenance charges to the club. It is an admitted fact that the respondents are entitled for complimentary accommodation for self and spouse for a period of 14 days in a year. It is also an admitted fact that the respondents had gone to Goa during September 2010. However, the respondents alleged that they have paid the entire amount of membership by believing the appellants words and gone on vacations to Goa during September 2010, but, during the course of their stay no discount on food items has been giving and there was no response inspite of telephone reminders from the appellants. In March 2011, the respondents decided to go to Bush Betta in Bandipura though the Company confirmed the booking , they have asked respondents to pay the taxes on account of guests who accompanied them in advance. Hence, due to the unsatisfactory services of the appellants company, the respondents issued a legal notice dt.12.04.2011 for cancellation of the membership and refund of the entire amount. However, the appellants failed to refund the same. Hence, the respondents approached the District Commission and filed a complaint. The appellants raised their contention that the respondents are not entitled to any refund of the amount.

6. Perused the Order passed by the District Commission. The respondents have established the payment of Rs.1,60,000/- for club membership then if the respondents paid full membership fees it is the duty of the appellants to provide all facilities which the complainants are entitled during their vacations, but, the appellants have not provided satisfactory services during vacations at Goa and Bandipura. Hence, the respondents have decided to cancel the membership. The appellants have not produced any documents to show that they have given satisfactory services to the respondents in Goa and Bandipura. In view of the matter, the respondents are entitled to recover the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- towards the membership of Country Vacations since the respondents are not willing to continue the members of the appellants and also the appellants cannot be impose any conditions on the members without providing benefits and satisfactory services. Hence, in our opinion, the District Commission having referred to the admitted facts arrived at the right conclusion and allowed the

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

complaint and directed the appellants to pay Rs.1,60,000/- without any interest because the appellants made arrangements for the respondents in Goa trip in 2010 and for that the respondents also liable to pay some reasonable service charges to the appellants. Under these circumstances, the order passed by the District Commission is just and proper and no interference is required. Hence, the following; ORDER The appeal is dismissed. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the District Commission for disbursement of the same to the complainant/s. Forward free copies to both parties.
O R