+++Before the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission [Central], 5th Floor ISBT Building, Kashmere Gate, Delhi
Complaint Case No. 123/2019
Smt. Asha Singhal w/o Sh. Karun Kumar Singhal
H. No. C-3/77, Sector-31,
Noida, Uttar Pradesh-201301 ...Complainant
Versus
M/s Country Holidays Inn & Suites Pvt. Ltd. (through its Directors)
Registered Office at :2045/1, 2nd Floor, Street No. 6,
Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, Delhi-110055
Also at:
3rd Floor, A-Block, OB Tower,
A-37, Sector 63, Noida-201301 ...Opposite Party
Date of filing: 30.05.2019
Date of Order: 11.08.2023
Coram: Shri Inder Jeet Singh, President
Ms. Shahina, Member -Female
Shri Vyas Muni Rai, Member
Shahina
ORDER
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that on 06.07.2018, the complainant received call from the OP; that the complainant has been shortlisted for free movie ticket and holiday voucher. The OP further stated that to avail the benefits, the complainant has to visit and attend a presentation by the company. Thereafter, the complainant along with her husband had reached the office of the OP on 07.07.2018 and OP started the presentation displaying lucrative hotels, resorts, places and location at prominent holiday destinations. OP motivated the complainant and her husband to take the membership. OP also offered special discount of Rs. 20,000/- for taking membership in the name of woman. The opposite party, thereafter asked the complainant to handover the credit card to check the acceptability by swiping for a small amount of Rs. 10,000/-; however, OP swiped the credit card for Rs. 1,00,000/- instead.of Rs.10,000/- After receiving the payment by OP from the complainant, OP asked the complainant to sign pre-printed agreement. Complainant was not given any opportunity to negotiate. The complainant, the very next date realized that terms of agreement are contrary to representations of the OP as below:-
- The seven days holiday benefit as represented was reduced to 6 nights and 7 days,
- There was no option of cancellation and termination on unsatisfactory services.
- There was clause of the annual maintenance charges of Rs. 7,000/-,this was not disclosed to the complainant.
2. The complainant and her husband approached to the opposite party and met Mr. Shekhar Chaudhary, GM of OP and had requested to the OP to deduct nominal penalty and refund the remaining amount. However, the officer of the OP refused and suggested the complainant to avail services of the OP once.
3. The complainant states that as per advice of the opposite party, complainant and her husband were given booking in hotel Lavender at Singapore from 20.08.2018 till 22.08.2018 in hotel Watermark at Bali from 23.08.2018 till 25.08.2018. The complainant has further alleged that after the booking OP had demanded annual maintenance charges from the complainant as well as for breakfast from the complainant; whereas annual maintenance and breakfast charges were never disclosed to the complainant at the time of presentation; the complainant had to remit Rs. 13,855/- to the OP which was fraudulently charged excess by Rs. 1150/- from the complainant as GST. The complainant noted the discrepancy and asked the opposite party to refund the excess amount vide email dated 05.08.2018. The complainant further alleged that the hotels provided by OP at Singapore and Bali was highly unpleasant and of inferior and complained to on website of OP. The complainant received a phone call from Mr. Rahul Arora, Sr. Customer Care Executive of opposite party who pressurized the complainant to withdraw the complaint and mark the same as resolved.
4. On 11.12.2018, the complainant requested the opposite party to avail free voucher for 2 nights/3 days booking at Agra from 01.01.2019 till 03.01.2019. Mr. Rahul Arora of opposite party called the complainant and stated that free voucher for Agra is not available. Thereafter, the complainant and her husband also held meeting with Mr. Ujjal Roy, Chief Executive and Mr. Rahul Arora, Sr. Customer Care Executive of OP; who refused to allow Agra holiday on free vouchers, OP told that the booking shall be given in the ‘membership nights ’ only. Saddened by the whimsical attitude of OP, the Complainant conceded to bookings from, ‘ membership nights’; OP gave three options vide email dated 20.12.2018 to the complainant namely (i) Hotel Atulyaa Taj (ii) The PL Palace and (iii) Clarks Shiraj, the options provided by OP were inferior and sub-standard when compared to the suite OP shown during presentation and on CHIS website.
5. On 08.01.2019, aggrieved by the deficient services rendered and unfair trade practice adopted by OP, the complainant sent email to OP through her husband demanding cancellation of membership and refund of proportionate fees; OP refused to refund the amount.
6. The above said attitude on the part of the OP amounts to deficiency in rendering service and restrictive unfair trade practice to the complainant. The complainant has prayed that the OP may be directed to refund the amount sum of Rs. 1,40,000/- along with interest @ 24% pa which was deposited by the complainant with the OP and OP be further directed to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of tension, harassment, agony, pain, anxiety suffered by complainant and be also directed to pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 50,000/-.
7. Notice of the complaint was duly served on 28.06.2019 at both address upon the OP through registered post but OP did not appear to contest the case accordingly OP was proceeded ex-parte on 26.07.2019.
8. The complainant has tendered her Ex-Parte Evidence and documents as annex. C1 to C10.
9. The complainant also filed written argument.
10. We have heard the Sh. Sanjeev Nikwani, Advocate for complainant and have also gone through the record of the case carefully.
11. The Ld. Counsel for the complainant during oral arguments submitted that the OP has not fulfilled its promise, firstly that the complainant will get 7 days holidays benefit as represented which was reduced to 6 nights and 7 days, secondly, there was no option of refund, cancellation and termination on unsatisfactory service and thirdly the clause of annual maintenance charges Rs. 7,000/-, was not disclosed to the complainant at the time of the presentation and agreement. In addition to that OP also charged excess of Rs. 1150/- as G.S.T. & demanded Rs. 13,855/- as breakfast charges which were paid by complainant but was not disclosed at the time of presentation. Not only this, facilities provided by OP during stay in hotel were also of inferior or quality and not as per the parameters of its promises. The Ld. Counsel further argued that the OP failed to perform of free movie ticket and holiday voucher. As such complaint may be allowed.
12. Perusal of the record shows that the complainant had availed the services of the OP; regarding holidays in Singapore and Bali; (Hotel Laveder at Singapore from 20.08.2018 till 22.08.2018 and in Hotel Watermark at Bali from 23.08.2018 till 25.08.2018; para-10 complainant paper book ). However the facilities and rooms provided were of much lower quality than what was promised to the complainant during the presentation. Although, OP has failed to fulfill of offering the holiday package membership, representing that the complainant would be provided the movie ticket and holiday voucher. Moreover, OP had charged the annual maintenance charges. The acts of want of OP for providing promised accommodation, services and want of refund of amount, when so request are deficiency of services and unfair trade practices.
13. In view of the documentary record, the Complainant had taken the membership from the OP for a period of 10 years; and stay for a period of 6 nights and 7 days per years for next to 10 Years, therefore the Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 1,40,000 /- against receipt which is as exhibit C2 on the record for agreement to the OP. On the other hand the Complainant herself has pleaded in para 11 of complaint that she had availed services of the OP. However, the Complainant has availed first service by the OP which is calculated proportionately a sum of Rs. 14000/- therefore, the remaining amount is Rs. 1,26,000/- thus the Complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.1,26,000/-.
14. Keeping in view of the above discussion, we are of opinion that OP is guilty of deficiency of service. Accordingly Complaint is parlty allowed and the OP is directed to refund the Rs. 1,26,000.
15. The complainant also claimed interest of 24% pa, however, there is no agreed rate of interest, therefore, interest @ 6% pa on the amount of Rs. 1,26,000/- from the date of filing of complaint till realization of amount in favour of complainant and against OP which will meet both ends. The complainant claims compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- in lieu of mental harassment by OP and litigation charges of Rs. 20,000/-. The complainant has claimed the amount since complainant was provided accommodation other then agreed upon & of sub-standred besides she also faced many difficulties, inconvenience and hardship while approaching the OP for seeking refund of amount paid by her.
16. Keeping in view of the above discussions, we are of the opinion that the complaint deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, complaint is allowed and the OP is directed to refund the Rs. 1,26,000/- along with interest @ 6% pa from the date of complaint till its realization, and OP is further directed to pay compensation of sum of Rs. 25,000/- on account of mental agony, tension, and harassment to the complainant; apart from Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.
17. OP is also directed to pay the above amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. In case amount is not paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, the rate of interest will be 7% pa (instead of 6% pa) on amount of Rs. 1,26,000/-.
18. Announced on this 11 August , 2023.
19. Copy of this Order be sent/provided forthwith to the parties free of cost as per rules for necessary compliance.
[Vyas Muni Rai] [ Shahina] [Inder Jeet Singh]
Member Member (Female) President
