BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.468 of 2016

Date of Instt. 24.11.2016

Date of Decision: 27.03.2019

Arvind Kumar S/o Sh. Raj Kumar, H. No.3 & 4 B I Bazar, Jalandhar Cantt. Ph:-9877100146.

..........Complainant

Versus

Connaught Plaza Restaurants Pvt. Ltd, Mehtab Complex, 9 Km Stone, Jalandhar Phagwara Highway Kotkalan, Jalandhar (Punjab) Ph:-09878622217 through its Manager Raman Bhardwaj/Dealing person Mr. Ragvir.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Jyotsna (Member)

Present: Sh. K. C. Malhotra, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

Sh. Gagandeep Mehta, Adv Counsel for the OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant is a consumer of OP as the complainant visited the restaurant of OP on 16.11.2016 and placed order for restaurant service as well as 9 pieces MCSwirl Choc* and also paid Rs.252/- for the said order by way of Credit Card. But the OP refused to give service inspite of taking payment of Rs.252/- through Credit Card and neither returned the said amount to the complainant. The complainant made a request to the dealing person at that time, but who refused to give service and also refused to return the money paid by the complainant and also misbehaved with the complainant and thereby complainant felt insulted at restaurant.

2. That till date the complainant has not received any response from the OP with regards to the above mentioned restaurant bill of Rs.252/-. The copy of restaurant service bill is placed on the file. Due to the above said facts, the complainant has suffered mental tension, harassment, inconvenience, financial loss etc. That due to the above said facts, there is a deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to pay Rs.20,000/- in all in terms of money, to the complainant as compensation for mental tension, harassment, inconvenience, financial loss etc. and further OP be directed to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation expenses.

3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared through its counsel and filed written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the answering respondent is the world's foremost leading Quick Service Restaurant, quality and safety of foods is of paramount importance to it. With this goal in mind, the answering respondent operates under the “made for you” platform. This is a unique system followed in the restaurant of the nature, like the one in question and further averred that the instant complaint is not maintainable as the same is devoid of any cause of action in favour of the complainant and against the answering respondents. The instant complaint is not an appropriate form for the complainant to raise this dispute as another complaint against the complainant is pending before the Police Station, Paragpur, Jalandhar, wherein the answering respondent had lodged a complaint against the complainant herein for his misbehaviour with the restaurant staff in an inebriated condition. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant, while making a misplaced allegation qua the answering respondents that despite diligently making a payment of Rs.252/- was not provided the food he ordered, has concealed material facts with a malafide intention to mislead this Forum and further submitted that the real and true facts are that the complainant with his friend, came to the restaurant on 16.11.2016, in inebriated stage, and ordered some food products. The complainant chose to pay by way of credit card. However, after the payment was processed, the complainant started fiddling with the credit card machine, which resulted in printing of the Day Close Report and caused disruption in further processing of the orders. When the restaurant staff objected to their action and requested them to stop, the complainant started misbehaving and abusing the restaurant staff. As there was also some lady customers in the restaurant, the restaurant manager attempted to intervene and tried to resolve the matter by taking the complainant outside the restaurant, but the complainant again came back inside the restaurant and again misbehaved with the restaurant staff by abusing them. Due to un-controlled, un-parliamentary and abusive behaviour of the complainant herein, the restaurant staff was forced to call the police officials. The complainant and his friend were taken to police station and after seeing the CCTV footage, which was provided to the police officials, the complaint of the restaurant manager of the answering respondent against the complainant for their misbehaviour and disrupting the restaurant operations was taken by the police officials and as such, there is no negligence on the part of the OP, nor OP ever refused to provide service rather it is own behaviour of the complainant, which create a nuisance at the spot. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant visited the restaurant of the OP, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

4. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant along with his counsel tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.CA along with some documents Ex.C-1- to Ex.C-4 and further tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.CB and Ex.CC and some documents Ex.C5- to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence.

5. Similarly, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.OA, Ex.OB and Ex.OC along with some documents Ex.O-1 to Ex.O-6 and closed the evidence.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

7. From the pleadings of both the parties, it has become clear that the complainant visited the restaurant of the OP on 16.11.2016 and admittedly placed an order for purchase of some food products and in view of that, also admittedly paid a sum of Rs.252/- through his Credit Card and it is also not denied by the OP that the said food products were not supplied to the complainant nor its amount has been returned back to the complainant, but due to the reason that the complainant himself create a scene at the spot and misbehaved with the staff of the restaurant by way of abusing and threatening and matter was reported to the police by submitting an application Ex.O-3 and Ex.O-4 and footage of CCTV Camera is also placed on the file Ex.O-5 and alleged that there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the OP.

8. We find from the documents available on the file, that a quarrel took place between the complainant and official of the restaurant and we are not going to decide the fate of that criminal activity of both the party, we are to only see whether there is a deficiency in service or not, regarding that we came to conclusion when both the party entangle with each other by way of offensive nature, then the question of providing service will not come in picture in any way. So, accordingly if any abusive language is used either by the complainant or by the restaurant, then it is to be decided by the Criminal Court and moreover, the criminal complaint made to the police is still pending, if so, then we are of the considered opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP and thus, the complaint of the complainant fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Jyotsna Karnail Singh

27.03.2019 Member President