Club High Sky cheated Rs.126000 from CA Ravi Pratap Singh, engaging in deceitful tactics that have left him feeling betrayed and frustrated.
Rather than addressing the issues directly, the club is submitting a roundabout reply on the PG portal, which only serves to mislead and obfuscate the truth.
Additionally, Club High Sky has failed to provide the promised services, leaving CA Ravi Pratap Singh without the support he was assured of, and raising questions about the club’s integrity and commitment to its members.
This pattern of behavior not only undermines trust but also calls for greater scrutiny of the promises made by such organizations, as many individuals may find themselves in similarly precarious situations.

A Consumer’s Ordeal: The Unanswered Questions in the Case Against Club High Sky

In a world increasingly reliant on digital transactions and online services, consumer protection is paramount. Yet, stories often emerge that highlight the grueling battle a citizen must fight when things go wrong, revealing the complexities and frustrations that many face in seeking justice.
This is one such story, detailed through grievance number 6500308, filed by Yogi M. P. Singh on behalf of CA Ravi Pratap Singh.
This case sheds light on a frustrating journey through India’s consumer redressal system, illustrating the challenges that consumers encounter, such as prolonged response times, inadequate support, and the often overwhelming bureaucracy that can leave individuals feeling lost and unheard.
The narrative not only uncovers the specific obstacles faced by Ravi Pratap Singh but also reflects a broader issue affecting countless consumers in the digital age, where rights are frequently overlooked in the pursuit of profit.

The Core Complaint: An Allegation of Fraud

The issue began with an alleged cheating incident that has raised significant concerns among the affected parties.
It involved a substantial sum of ₹1,26,000 that was paid by CA Ravi Pratap Singh to a travel company that has come under scrutiny.
The company, known as CLUB HIGH SKY (OPC) PRIVATE LIMITED, is alleged to have engaged in deceptive practices that have led many individuals to question the integrity of its operations.
The complainant, Mr. Singh, describes the company as a “fraud company whose sole job is to cheat the innocent and gullible people,” highlighting his deep disappointment and anger over what he perceives to be a betrayal of trust.
This unfortunate incident has sparked a broader conversation about the need for increased vigilance and regulation within the travel industry to protect consumers from similar fraudulent activities in the future.

Key Details of the Grievance:

• Complainant: Yogi M. P. Singh (on behalf of CA Ravi Pratap Singh)
• Company: CLUB HIGH SKY (OPC) PRIVATE LIMITED
• Amount: ₹1,26,000
• Nature of Complaint: Delay in refund / Cheating
• Grievance Registration Date: 2024-11-17

A Timeline of Inaction and Frustration

The complainant, frustrated not just with the company they are dealing with but also feeling hindered by the perceived inertia of the regulatory bodies that are meant to protect consumers, finds themselves in a difficult position.
This sense of frustration is compounded by the lack of timely responses and meaningful action from those in charge of oversight.
The timeline of events paints a picture of a system caught in a loop of communication without resolution, where emails go unanswered and phone calls seem to lead nowhere.
As the days pass by, the complainant’s initial hope of finding a swift resolution dwindles, replaced by a growing sense of disillusionment with an infrastructure that appears to be more interested in maintaining the status quo than in addressing consumer grievances effectively.

First Action (2023): The matter was first raised with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in November 2023. The Registrar of Companies (ROC), Kanpur, reportedly took up the complaint with Club High Sky. They sent letters on March 7, 2023, and July 17, 2023. Despite reminders sent to the company and its director, Sayed Ahmad Mohsin, the complainant, never informed. There was no definitive outcome, communicated to complainant.

Disposed Without Resolution: On September 25, 2023, the ROC Kanpur marked the grievance as “Disposed.” They noted that a response from the company was awaited. The complainant calls this a “mockery of the law.” They point out that waiting for a response for nine months from an unresponsive company is futile.

National Consumer Helpline (NCH) Involvement (Late 2024): The case, then pursued through the NCH.

• November 20, 2024: Grievance, emailed to the company.
• November 27, 2024: Reminder 1, sent.
• December 2, 2024: Reminder 2, sent.

The Final NCH Remark (January 4, 2025): After receiving no response, the NCH agent concluded:

NCH forwarded the Grievance to the company.

They also sent 2 reminders.” Still, no response, received. You file a case at the designated Consumer Commission online. Please visit edaakhil.nic.in”

The case was once again marked as “Disposed.”

“Who Will Bell the Cat?” – A Cry Against a Broken System

The complainant’s feedback on the process is scathing. Rating the experience as “Unsatisfactory,” he questions the power and efficacy of government departments.

“Think about the arbitrariness and Tyranny of the companies… who are violating consumer rights… and not accountable to the government of India is a mockery of the law. Is the government capable of safeguarding the consumer rights of the citizens? The departments are not able to act before such companies… It seems that we are ruled by sheer anarchy.”

He argues that when a company can simply ignore multiple official communications from bodies like the NCH. He mentions it can also ignore communications from the ROC. This scenario exposes a systemic vulnerability. He raises a fundamental question: If the designated authorities are incapable of compelling a response, who holds these companies accountable?

The Path Forward: A Legal Battle

The final official advice to the complainant is to take the legal route, which is often deemed as a necessary course of action in situations where complaints have not been satisfactorily resolved through informal channels. This involves filing a case through the e-Daakhil portal, a user-friendly and efficient online platform designed specifically for consumer commissions to address grievances.
While this is the procedurally correct next step, it places a significant burden of responsibility on the consumer. They must not only start the process but also pursue a formal legal case, which encompasses various stages of legal proceedings.
This process can be both time-consuming and expensive, requiring careful preparation of documentation, potential court appearances, and sometimes the need for legal representation. Additionally, there may be uncertainties regarding the outcome, which can add to the stress and frustration experienced by consumers.
Therefore, it is essential for individuals to fully understand the implications and commitments involved before proceeding with this route.

For CA Ravi Pratap Singh and his representative, a journey began with the hope of a holiday package. It has now turned into a multi-year battle against corporate indifference. They also face bureaucratic delay. Their story serves as a stark reminder. The road to justice is long for many consumers in India. A case being “disposed” on a portal is a world away from being truly “resolved.”

Consumer Grievance Against Club High Sky: A Case Study

ROC Kanpur Registered more than 50% fraud companies

Club High Sky by colluding with Yes Bank looted INR 1,26,000