DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No.188/2019

Shri Uday Nair

S/o Late Shri Madhavan Nair

R/o 515, Pocket-5,

Mayur Vihar Phase-1,

Delhi-110091.

                                                                                      ….Complainant

Versus

Amuse House,

1^st Floor, Ansal Plaza,

August Kranti Marg,

Hudco Place, Andrews Ganj Extn.

Andrews Ganj

New Delhi-110049

                                                                                   ….Opposite Party

                                                Date of Institution        : 04.07.2019   Date of Order                : 18.08.2020

Coram:

Ms. Rekha Rani, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

1. Briefly put Udai Nayar, the complainant approached Amuse House hereinafter referred to as OP to host a party/ event for his friends to be held in the evening on 25.05.2019. Complainant paid Rs.10,000/- in cash towards advance to secure the booking for the party. Confirmation of the advance receipt by OP was given by way of a text message which is filed alongwith the complaint, marked as Annexure C1.                    
   1. It is averred by the complainant that the quality of services and food provided by OP was far below the expectations. The food and snack served were not in accordance with quantity assured at the time of booking. It is next alleged that OP closed the bar at 11.30 PM and the reasons cited for the same by the bartender was that they do not have the license to serve alcohol after 11.30 PM. However, in the adjacent party OP continued to serve liquor even post midnight.
   2. It is stated that the complainant on making the final payment of Rs.39,100/- requested for invoice. But the OP through its manager refused to give the invoice and stated that the same would attract GST. The manager of OP stated that the invoice was not beneficial both for the complainant and the OP. It is averred that at the time of booking the complainant was given a quotation of Rs.1,700/- per guest inclusive of all taxes.
   3. To complainant’s dismay the guests invited left unsatisfied and consequently the party was unsuccessful. The complainant also received messages from his guests recording their dissatisfaction on the facebook page which is annexed as Annexure C of the complaint.
   4. Alleging deficiency in service on part of OP, complainant requests for refund of Rs.39,100/- the amount paid by the complainant to OP. Additionally complainant prays for the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of reputation, goodwill, harassment and mental agony.     
2. OP was served notice. As none appeared on behalf of OP, it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 12.10.2019.
3. Evidence by way of affidavit is filed by Mr. Udai Nayar. Complainant in support of his case has annexed Annexure C-1 the whatsapp conversation between the parties wherein OP admits receiving Rs.10,000/- as advance and certain Facebook posts.
4. Complainant on two grounds is alleging deficiency. First ground is poor quality and insufficient quantity of the food that was served. Complainant has not adduced any documentary evidence to support this allegation.

The second grievance of the complainant was of poor service as alcohol was not served to them beyond certain time whereas it served to the adjoining party beyond midnight. Bald averment without any corroborative evidence has no value in the eyes of law. Complainant has relied on the Facebook posts of his friends but none of the friends have filed any affidavit submitting the same as.

5. At the time of oral arguments, complainant’s advocate was asked by the Forum if he could show us the proof of payment/ consideration paid by him to OP. Complainant’s advocate replied that it should suffice that he has made a Statement on Affidavit as regards the payment of Rs.39,100/- made by him to OP.

6. Complainant’s submission that the representative of OP refused to give the invoice citing the reason that the same would attract GST does not hold any water before us. It is common practice that consumers, to avoid paying GST, forgoe taking the invoice / bill from the restaurants or the shopkeepers. It is presumed that invoice/ bill was not taken from the restaurant to avoid paying GST as it was beneficial both to the complainant and the OP. In the process they caused loss to the Government exchequer and also complainant lost the most vital piece of evidence i.e. of having paid Rs.39,100/- or any other amount towards the final bill.
7. We are of the opinion that mere averments on affidavit without any corroboration and which have not been treated by cross-examination cannot be treated as gospel truth. Hence, without any proof of payment / consideration complainant is not entitled to any refund or compensation. Further this Forum is of the opinion that the complainant to avoid paying the GST did not insist on getting the invoice from OP. Complainant’s case is hit by legal maxim – ‘He who comes into equity must come with clean hands’. In view of the discussion above, we dismiss the complaint.

7.      Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 18.08.2020