Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/1021/2019

Sangeeta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Club Star Wood - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

05 Mar 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/1021/2019
Date of Institution	:	22/10/2019
Date of Decision	:	05/03/2020

 

Sangeeta, Resident of H.No.2315, Sector 38-C, Chandigarh.

 

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

 

[1]     Mohamad Shahbaz Alam, Director, Club Star Wood, Office No.55, Lane No.2, West End Marg, Saket, New Delhi – 110068.

 

[2]     Morvin Massy, Director, Club Star Wood, First Floor, B-1, Ext. Phase E-22 MCIE, South Delhi – 110044.

 

[3]     Anand O/o Club Star Wood, First Floor, B-1, Ext. Phase E-22 MCIE, South Delhi – 110044.

 

[4]     Ms.Alka O/o Club Star Wood, First Floor, B-1, Ext. Phase E-22 MCIE, South Delhi – 110044.

 

[5]     Sohil O/o Club Star Wood, First Floor, B-1, Ext. Phase E-22 MCIE, South Delhi – 110044.

 

[6]     Mohamad Shahbaz Alam, Director, Club Star Wood, First Floor, B-1, Ext. Phase E-22 MCIE, South Delhi – 110044.

 

…… Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	DR.S.K.SARDANA	MEMBER

                               

Present	:	Complainant in person
	:	Opposite Parties ex-parte.

 

PER Surjeet Kaur, Member

1.         As averred in the Complaint, the Complainant opted for the services of Club Star Wood for national and international hotel bookings, for which the Complainant deposited Rs.95,000/-. Payment was done by SBI Credit Card. However, when SBI refused to provide interest free installments, Club Star Wood assured to refund interest and service tax. Despite providing all necessary documents, Opposite Parties failed to refund the interest & service tax. Besides this, Opposite Parties also assured jewelry coupon of Rs.21,000/-, flight tickets & stay at Goa for two persons free of cost, but did not fulfill the same. Also, the Opposite Parties also failed to honour their commit to provide room in Shimla and to provide booking in Dubai. The Complainant also tried to book hotels for the tour to Singapore Malaysia, but to no success. Feeling aghast by the unprofessional services of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant sought refund of her money, along with interest, but to no avail. When all the frantic efforts made by the Complainant, failed to fructify, as a measure of last resort, alleging that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties tantamount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, he has preferred the instant Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, seeking various reliefs. 
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Parties despite service, therefore, they were proceeded ex-parte on 01.01.2020.
4.         Complainant led evidence.      
5.         We have gone through the entire record with utmost care and circumspection.
6.         Significantly, the Opposite Parties did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Parties draws an adverse inference against them.
7.         The non-appearance of the Opposite Parties shows that they have nothing to say in their defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
8.         Per strength of Annexure A-I to A-IV, it is evident that Complainant availed the services of the Opposite Parties and paid Rs.95,000/-, but was never provided the services which were promised to her.        It is the case of the Complainant that when she requested the Opposite Parties to refund the amount paid by her, along with interest, Opposite Parties took no steps to provide any solution to her.
9.         In these set of circumstances, it is established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The harassment suffered by the Complainant is also writ large.
10.         The Opposite Parties have certainly and definitely indulged into unfair trade practice as they ought to have taken prompt steps to air the grievance of the Complainant, which they miserably failed to do and propelled this unwarranted litigation upon the Complainant.  Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the Opposite Parties.
11.         For the reasons recorded above, the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Parties, and the same is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties are, jointly and severally, directed:-

[a]    To refund the booking amount of Rs.95,000/- to the Complainant;

[b]    To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and for causing harassment caused to her.

[c]    To also pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. 

12.         The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by Opposite Parties; thereafter, Opposite Parties shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as in sub-para [c]. 
13.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced

05^th March,2020                          

Sd/-

(RATTAN SINGH THAKUR)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(DR.S.K.SARDANA)

MEMBER

 

 “Dutt”