First Appeal No. A/343/2016. Case: Country Club (India) Ltd. Vs Sanjana Kaundal. Union Territory State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberFirst Appeal No. A/343/2016
CounselFor Appellant: Pardeep Sharma, Advocate and For Respondents: H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate
JudgesJasbir Singh, J. (President), Dev Raj and Padma Pandey, Members
IssueConsumer Law
Judgement DateMarch 23, 2017
CourtUnion Territory State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


Jasbir Singh, J. (President), (Chandigarh)

  1. Appellant/Opposite Party has filed this appeal against order dated 29.9.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short 'the Forum' only), allowing a complaint filed by respondent/complainant.

  2. Before the Forum, it was case of the complainant that OP by giving a call on her husband's mobile phone called them to their office stating that their mobile number had worn a prize. They were asked to collect it. When they reached in the office of OP, no such prize was available, rather they were allured to sign a holiday package scheme for 10 years on payment of an amount of 70,000/- plus Rs. 2100/-. They were promised that they can enjoy vacation facilities in resorts of the appellant for a specific number of days and also can enjoy many other facilities. It was specifically stated that thereafter one application was got signed on 20.8.2013. It was grievance of the complainant that as promised, blue season membership cards were not supplied to them. It is further stated that at the time when they were allured to sign the agreement, she was told that the appellant owned a club at Zirakpur. If any customer organizes a function therein, only electricity charges will be claimed by the appellant. However, no such club was existed there. In the last week of December, 2013, when they approached OP to book a trip to Goa, they were refused by stating that during that period, facility was not available. Fed up with the behavior of the appellant, she wrote a letter seeking refund of the amount paid. When nothing was done, she filed a consumer complaint.

  3. Upon notice, reply was filed by the appellant/Opposite Party. It was stated that the complainant visited its office at her own. No telephone call was made to her. She was satisfied with the scheme and purchased vacation membership for 10 years by signing an agreement. It was further stated that there was no necessity to issue any membership card, as alleged. It was further stated that non-issue of Identity card will not be going to effect the right of a customer to enjoy vacations. It was also denied that the complainant approached the appellant for booking in the month of December, 2013 and she was refused booking, as alleged. It was further stated that as per terms and conditions of the agreement, the amount cannot be refunded.

  4. Both parties led evidence. The Forum, on analysis of pleadings of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT