COUNTRY VACATIONS Vs. T.L.N. SHASTRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.246/2006 on the file of District Forum-I, Hyderabad, opposite parties 1 and 2 preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainants entered into a purchase agreement on 21st August, 2002 with opposite party No.1, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, for purchase of Resort, unit type, season and purchase price and make them ready by the end of March, 2002 after receipt of the total purchase price. The complainants submitted that according to the agreement, he will be issued a Membership certificate in respect of the weekly period(s) referred in the agreement relating to the apartment type and apartment number. The complainants submitted that they paid total purchase price and administration charges which costs Rs.86,000/- i.e. purchase price Rs.76,000/- plus administration charges Rs.10,000/- vide receipt Nos.007588 and 007565 on 25th and 23rd August, 2002 respectively while entering into purchase agreement. They further submitted that even though three years lapsed, opposite parties neither sent Membership certificate as per clause 5 of the agreement or any intimation regarding the status of the venture at Medchal, Hyderabad. The complainants visited opposite parties office and also sent registered letters on 19-5-2005 and 16-1-2006 to opposite parties to cancel the Membership and refund the deposit amount. They further submitted that opposite party no.3 sent a circular mentioning the Holiday planner for the year 2003-2005 on 4-3-2003. The complainants submitted that the opposite parties failed to fulfill the commitment given vide purchase agreement dated 21-8-2002 nor sent any Membership certificate due to which the complainants faced lot of inconvenience and their hard earned money was help up with the opposite parties without gaining simple interest and that they are not interested to take unit at Medchal, Hyderabad or any place in India. They submitted that they made several visits to refund the money and alleging deficiency in service, they approached the District Forum for refund of Rs.86,000/- with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of deposit till the date of payment, together with compensation of Rs.40,000/- and costs of Rs.10,000/-.

(3.) Opposite parties 1 and 2 filed counter and contended that the complaint is not maintainable and submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation. They admitted that they had entered into purchase agreement with the complainant on 21-8-2002 wherein the owner of the Resort i.e. opposite parties 1 and 2 agreed to develop AMRUTHA DECASA at Medchal and further agreed that in the event the apartment not being available at the timeshare purchased by the purchaser, the owner shall arrange another similar type of apartment and that the purchaser shall have right to sell, rent or bequeath the timeshares purchased under the agreement. The alternate resort, namely, HOTEL AMRUTHA CASTLE, which is affiliated to respondent No.3 was made available as alternative accommodation till the construction of AMRTUHA DECASA is completed. They further submitted that they issued VLM card for life membership in the country club as well as a card was issued by RCI to the complainant and hence it is not correct to state that Membership was not issued and it is for the members to utilize the facilities at country club as well as weekly holidays once in a year in the Home Resort or other resorts which are affiliated to opposite party No.3. The membership in respect to RCI was sent to opposite party No.3 in the event of the apartment not being ready and that opposite party no.3 had made alternate arrangements in AMRUTHA Castle. They submitted that there is no deficiency or unfair trade practice and that they never agreed to return back the amount and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.