State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Rupen Sen vs The Secretary, Duke Club on 2 February, 2016
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. FA/1345/2013 (Arisen out of Order Dated 24/10/2013 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/78/2013 of District Hooghly) 1. Rupen Sen Mallick Lane, Kharua Bazar, Chinsurah, Hooghly. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. The Secretary, Duke Club Town Guard Road, Chinsurah, Hooghly. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. JAGANNATH BAG MEMBER For the Appellant: Mr. Dulal chandra Sarkar, Advocate For the Respondent: Mrs. Namrata Das, Advocate ORDER Dt. 02.02.16 JAGANNATH BAG, MEMBER
The present appeal is directed against the Order, dated 24.10.13 , passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hooghly, in CC Case No. 78 of 2013 , whereby the complaint was dismissed against the OP Club ex parte .
The Complainant's case, in brief, was as follows:
The Complainant's son, Sarajit Sen, is an associate member of the Duke Club , Chinsura, Hooghly, since 14.04.2011. The club organized a function (singing and dancing ) on the night of 31st December, 2012 . As there was no prior notice in that regard , the Complainant's son was not aware of the function and as such could not participate in the said function. He was out of station on that date. Thereafter, the OP / Duke Club did not allow the Complainant's son to play table tennis further. As a result, his son, aged 10 years, became frustrated for not getting opportunity to play table tennis, though he had a desire to prove himself as a table tennis champion with full bloom. In the said circumstances, the Complainant prayed for direction upon the OP, i.e., the Secretary, Duke Club to allow the Complainant's son to play table tennis at the Club so that the trainer could motivate him to fulfill his goal and also to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental /physical harassment and also for loss of 5 months' time and money.
The OP did not appear in spite of service of notice and no W.V. was filed by them. The matter was heard ex parte.
Ld. Forum below having perused the petition of complaint / affidavit- in- chief in support of his complaint and other materials on record observed that the Complainant did not produce any document showing terms and conditions agreed to be followed by the Complainant as well as by the OP Club and there was no document to show that the OP Club was bound to provide or give any specific training to the Complainant's son. Considering all facts and circumstances , Ld. Forum below concluded that the Complainant was not able to prove specifically any deficiency of service on the part of the OP . The complaint was dismissed against the OP ex parte .
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the Ld. Forum below , the Complainant / Appellant has come up before this Commission with prayer for direction, inter alia, to set aside the impugned order dated 24.10.2013.
The memorandum of appeal has been filed together with copies of the impugned order , the petition of complaint , a letter dated 13.03.2013 addressed by the Complainant/Appellant to the Secretary, Duke Club, a copy of Report Book for the Session 2012 -13 issued by Techno India Group Public School and a medical certificate of fitness issued on 17.08.2013 by Dr. S.K. Chakroborty.
Ld. Advocates appearing for both the parties have been heard.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that the OP Club organized a singing and dancing programme at night on 31.12.2012 for which a mandate was given to all members for payment of Rs. 500/- and also for compulsory attendance in the said programme. As the Complainant and his son did not have any knowledge of such programme, they went out on tour to Orissa. Thereafter, the Secretary of the club did not allow the son of the Complainant / Appellant to join the club. As a result, the son of the Appellant has been deprived of getting training of table tennis in spite of submission of application for readmission . The son of the Complainant / Appellant has become a patient of mental frustration coupled with nervous system. The order of the Ld. Forum below did not take into consideration those facts. On the ground of non-submission of some vital documents the complaint was rejected. The impugned order was arbitrary in nature and the same order suffers from material irregularity in so far as all receipts showing subscription of payment to the OP Club were submitted which the Ld. Forum below failed to appreciate. The impugned order may be set aside and the complaint may be allowed.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Respondents/OP submitted that the Appellant/Complainant has added several points in his appeal , though such points were not in the petition of complaint. It was submitted that the Duke Club was formed for charitable purpose including social and philanthropic purpose. It was also submitted that there was nothing in the petition of complaint showing that the OP was responsible for providing training in table tennis to the Complainant's son or any service for consideration. No document of any agreement between the OP Respondent and the Complainant / Appellant could be produced before the Ld. Forum below. There was no cause to file the complaint case as a consumer before the Ld. Forum below . It is also not a fact that the money receipts showing payment of fees by the Duke Club is only monthly subscription for playing table tennis . It was beyond the knowledge of the Respondent/OP if the son of the Complainant / Appellant got any shock of unusual nature or became a patient of mental frustration. The Ld. Forum below adjudicated the matter in clear terms holding that the complaint was not specific and no specific deficiency in service was cited by the Complainant /Appellant. The order has been passed in a reasoned manner and as such the same needs to be upheld.
Decision with Reasons :
The point for consideration is whether the impugned order suffers from material irregularity or legal infirmity.
It is the case of the Complainant/Appellant that as his son did not attend the programme held on 31.12.2012 for which a mandate was given to all members for payment of Rs. 500/- , his son was not allowed to play table tennis at the OP Club . As a result , he was frustrated and suffered tremendous shock and became a patient of mental frustration coupled with nervous syndrome .
On the other hand , it is the case of the OP / Respondent that there was no agreement with the Complainant / Appellant that training in table tennis would be given to be Complainant's son on payment of fees. Further, it is also the case of the OP / Respondent that no document could be shown by the Complainant/Appellant to establish that for organizing a programme of singing and dancing , they demanded Rs. 500/- from each member.
As revealed from the impugned order, no document in support of the averment of the Complainant /Appellant in connection with collection of money for the programme could be produced . Further, as observed by the Ld. Forum below, there was no document to show that the OP Club was responsible for providing training in table tennis to the Complainant's son .
In fact , no material evidence showing consumer and service provider relationship between the Appellant/Complainant and the OP / Respondent was produced before the Ld. Forum below for which the complaint petition was decided to have suffered from 'vagueness'.
We find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Hence, Ordered That the appeal be and the same is dismissed on contest. The impugned order is confirmed. There shall be no separate order as to cost. [HON'BLE MR. DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. JAGANNATH BAG] MEMBER