State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Mr. Gaurav Khemka vs T. K. International Ltd. on 6 June, 2018
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 Complaint Case No. CC/325/2015 ( Date of Filing : 25 Aug 2015 ) 1. Mr. Gaurav Khemka 25, Ballygunge Park, Kolkata - 700 019, West Bengal. ...........Complainant(s) Versus 1. T. K. International Ltd. Through Toshali Sands, 8, Camac Street, Shantiniketan Building, 8th Floor, Room no.-10, Kolkata - 700 017. ............Opp.Party(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER For the Complainant: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jewrajka , Advocate For the Opp. Party: Ms. Sarda Sha, Ms, Indrani Chakraborty., Advocate Dated : 06 Jun 2018 Final Order / Judgement Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member
Case of the Complainant, in short, is that, sometimes in or about 1998, the OP was offering membership against cottages of various sizes at its resort at Puri and the OP approached Complainant's grandfather, since deceased, to become a member and avail of the benefits and services of the said cottages. Accordingly, his grandfather, since deceased, took Timeshare membership for 99 years on and from 01-01-1998 for the maximum occupancy of 6 persons at 2 bedroom cottage at Puri on payment of entire subscription fees for 99 years and management fees for the concerned year. After the demise of Complainant's grandfather, the membership service was not availed of by his legal heirs. The Complainant subsequently approached the OP for incorporating him as second applicant and for treating him as a 'member'. On payment of due charges, the Complainant was incorporated as member and the agreement was treated as subsisting under the same terms and condition as on 11-01-1998. Upon being incorporated as member of the said resort of the OP, the Complainant intended to avail their services and as such on 15-01-2013, requested the OP to book a cottage at Puri. Unfortunately, the OP refused to book any cottage and offered accommodation in a building instead. As the OP did not relent despite repeated requests, feeling perturbed, the Complainant through a letter dated 31-10-2013, requested the OP to refund all payments made pursuant to the said agreement, including the one-time subscription fee and management charges. However, the OP avoided payment of the said sum also. In view of this, the complaint was filed.
Per contra case of the OP is that, it was clearly mentioned in the Membership Agreement dated 11-01-1998 that the member was entitled to get accommodation in 2 BR apartment. Therefore, the Complainant was not allocated accommodation in cottage as per his demand. Accordingly, the OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Decision with reasons We have heard the averments of the Ld. Advocates of the parties and gone through the documents on record.
The dispute primarily revolves over the fact whether or not the Complainant was entitled to get accommodation in a Cottage. In support of his claim, the Complainant furnished the copy of a brochure, purportedly issued by the OP and on the other, the OP banked upon the copy of Agreement dated 11-01-1998 executed by and between the OP and the grandfather of the Complainant, since deceased.
To call a spade a spade, the subject membership agreement in unequivocal terms stipulated that as a Member, K.K.Khemka, since deceased, was entitled to get accommodation in 2 BR Apartment. Nowhere in the said agreement, there was any such mention of the fact said K.K.Khemka, since deceased, was supposed to get accommodation in a cottage at Toshali Sands Resort, Puri, unless of course he intended to upgrade such accommodation on payment of due fees. Since the Complainant stepped into the shoes of his deceased grandfather, admittedly, under the same terms and conditions, it is needless to say that he was also eligible for getting accommodation in 2BR Apartment only.
On the other hand, notwithstanding, the Complainant filed the copy of a brochure in support of his contention, on a reference to the same, we do not come across any such commitment being made by the OP whereof prospective Timeshare Members were assured of accommodation only in Cottages. The brochure merely states that it has 55 ethnic villas and cottages alongside 54 luxury suites. In our considered opinion, mere presence of cottages at the subject Resort does not entitle one to automatically get accommodation in it; the terms and conditions of the agreement executed in this regard holds the key.
It appears that the whole dispute originated over some sort of misgiving in the mind of the Complainant. It was incumbent on his part to carefully go through the inherent clauses contained in the agreement before renewing the same after the death of his grandfather. If he did not do so, it was his fault.
In absence of any such cogent documentary/material proof to suggest that the OP made any such promise before signing of the agreement that Complainant's grandfather, since deceased, or for that matter the Complainant would be housed only in the cottage, the OP cannot be accused of indulging in any sort of unfair trade practice.
Regarding the claim for refund of membership subscription or other charges, we afraid, the terms and conditions of the agreement nipped any such possibility in the bud. According to the terms and conditions of the subject membership agreement, the same is legally binding and cannot be reversed, cancelled or recinded after 72 hours of signing the agreement. In view of this, Complainant deserves no relief on this score also.
In the result, the complaint fails.
Hence, O R D E R E D The case stands dismissed on contest against the OP without any cost. [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA] MEMBER