State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M/S.Sun Valley Club vs Sri.H.S Nagaraj on 1 December, 2004
*\ \. BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CON SUIWER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMIVHSSION BANGALORE. DATED ; 1" DECEMBER 2004 PRESENT THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE CHANDRASHEKARAIAH : PRESIDENT SMTZRAMA ANANTH :MElVIBER SRI.J.N.SR]NIVASA IVIURTHY : NEEMBER APPEAL NO. 1066/03 M/s.Su11 Valley Club, No.21, Gollarapalya, Magadi Main Road, Bangalore-560 O91. APPELLANT (by S1'i.H.R.Ananthakris1ma Murthy, adv.) .='V-3:. S1i.H.S.Nagaraj, "Shcshanag" 17/18, Hoysala Colony, Sunkadakattc, Vishwaneedam Post, Banga1o1'e--560 091. ...RESPONDl£N'1' (by Sri.R.Rajagopalan, adv.) 2;: m as: an ORDER
JUSTICE CHANDRASHE PRESIDENT This appeal is by GP challenging the order of the DF allowing the complaint of the complainant.
The facts in this case are as follows :
The complainant has paid a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 15.8.92 to get himself admitted as a member of GP club. Pursuant to that he was also availing service of the club though alleges certain deficiencies in providing sen/ice. The complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.15,000/- as he is not in a position to
- 2 _ avail the services of GP as he has been transferred out of Bangalore. It is stated in para 7 of the complaint which reads as follows :
"The complainant submits that the services of the opposite party could not be availed by him because of the fact that he has been transferred out ofBangalorc."
The prayer in the complaint is for refund of Rs.15,000/- with interest as he is not in a position to avail the services of the club. The DF proceeded to allow the complaint of the complainant on the ground that refusing to refund the amount by OP amounts to deficiency in service.
The case of OP before the DF is that the amount paid by the complainant is non refundable and therefore, he is not entitled for refund. In support of this OP relies upon clause 6 of the bye-law of the club which reads as follows :
"The amount paid as earnest money or subscription is non refundable in any event."
4/ Sii.Rajagopalam adv. appearing for the resdt. submits that he liasnfit paid the 0w-A .44-c'r V' V membership deposit as earnest money or subscription, 'l'herefore, he is entitled to recover the same fiom OP. In support of this submission the LC for the resdt. has not produced any contract or byelaws under which he is entitled for refund of mxamcir (M 'W3 C:)-Lw}~'bVl the money. Without going into eonsidwnuzirsn whether the amount paid by the M complainant is a membership deposit or earnest money or subscription we propose to dispose of the appeal on the very averment made in the complaint itself.
As stated earlier the complainant has prayed for refund of Rs.l5,000/- on the ground that he is not in a position to avail the services of OP since he has been transferred out of Bangalore i.e., though OP is willing to provide service the complainant himself is not in a position to avail that service as he has been .. 3 _ transferred out of Bangaloie. If the complainant himself on his own is not in a position to avail the services though OP is ready and willing to render service then it cannot be said that there is any deficiency in service on the part of OP. Hence, we pass the following, ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed. The parties to bear their own costs.
*9 see so ,, " ' \_/Wr l%'IE}v ER P» ER PRESIDENT Ds'*' lIIeotder"daied 1512' , " ormeetstate"
BEFORE2- m I. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE $.N. KAPOOR, I PRESIDING MEMBER MR. B.K. TAMINI, MEMBER For the Petitioner : Nemo ' Deted : 2"" May, 2005 L ..,..w 0 R D E R ' This case has been calied out twice. Even at theflsecond pass over, no I one is present on behalf of the petitioner. Dismissed for non--prosecution. "W I ts,N. K/\I'()(.)I'{.)
-4» -A-'1 M I-1M IILR
-can:
' "(i3..r<. TAIMNI) sg/3 MEMBER