Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/182/2018

Pradeep Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Goibibo Corporate Office - Opp.Party(s)

Shiti Jain Dutt

01 May 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/182/2018
Date of Institution	:	24/04/2018
Date of Decision	:	01/05/2019

 

Pradeep Kumar son of Sh. Pritam Singh, Resident of Flat No.2058-E, Sector 63, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

 

1.     Goibibo, Corporate Office, 5^th Floor, Good Earth City Centre, Sector 50, Gurgaon – 122018, through its Proprietor/ Manager/ Authorized Signatory.

2.     The Lalit, 2B & 2C, Jagatpura Road, Near Jawahar Circle, Opposite Malviya Nagar, Sector 7, Jaipur, India, through its Proprietor/ Manager/ Auth. Signatory.

……Opposite Parties

 

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

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Ms.Shiti Jain Dutt, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Varun Sharma, Vice Counsel for Sh.Satpal Dhamija, Counsel for Opposite Party No.1.
	:	Sh.Ankit Gupta, Vice Counsel for Sh.Mukesh Kumar, Counsel for Opposite Party No.2.

 

PER DR.S.K.Sardana, member

1.         In brief, the Complainant had booked a room at Hotel The Lalit i.e. with Opposite Party No.2 for 02 Adults on 05.02.2018 through Opposite Party No.1 vide Booking ID HTLK6WEDLV. The booking was confirmed by Opposite Party No.1 vide mail dated 05.02.2018 (Annexure C-1). The Complainant made the payment of Rs.21,350/- for booking the room with Opposite Party No.2 from 05.02.2018 to 07.02.2018 and the booking amount was paid to Opposite Party No.1 on their online site. The hotel confirmation voucher with all details was sent to the Complainant by Opposite Party No.1 on the mail (Annexure C-2). The Complainant and his wife reached the hotel (Opposite Party No.2) on 05.02.2018 at 9.00 P.M. When the Complainant went to Reception of the Hotel to make a check-in against the confirmed booking by Opposite Party No.1 to the shock of the Complainant, it was conveyed to him by Opposite Party No.2 that they do not have a booking in the name of the Complainant. Feeling aggrieved, at about 09.30 P.M. the Complainant called at the Customer Care of Opposite Party No.1 to resolve their problem and when nothing positive could come out, the Complainant wrote a mail at 11:30 P.M. highlighting his plight.  After waiting for nearly 04 hours, Opposite Party No.2 finally reconfirmed the booking of the Complainant and he was provided a room at 1.00 A.M.Hence the complainant has brought this consumer complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.
3.         Opposite Party No.1 contested the complaint and filed its reply, inter alia, pleading that there was no fault on its part and if there was any it was on the part of Opposite Party No.2 as despite the confirmed room booking, the Opposite Party No.2 took time for checking-in. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party No.1 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         Opposite Party No.2 filed its reply, inter alia, admitting the basic facts of the case. It has been pleaded that there was no delay from the Opposite Party No.2 as the Complainant was not carrying the voucher/confirmation no. and was not clear as from whom and how he had made the booking, some time was spent in confirming the same. The Complainant was trying to reach the Customer Care, meanwhile the staff of Opposite Party No.2 spoke to the Goibibo Customer Carte who informed that the booking was made through Expedia Portal and not by Goibibo. After confirmation, the Complainant was offered room. As a goodwill gesture, Opposite Party No.2 provided an upgraded luxury suite instead of regular/deluxe room (for which booking was made) without any additional cost. The Complainant duly accepted the offer by taking the upgraded luxury suite and after remaining as guest for two nights checked out on 07.02.2018. The Complainant was given best services in the hotel and there was no Complaint made on any account. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
5.         The Complainant also filed separate rejoinders to the respective written statements filed by the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2, wherein the averments as contained in the complaint have been reiterated and those as alleged in the written statements by the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 have been controverted.
6.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
7.         We have gone through the entire record and have also heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Parties.
8.         The main grievance of the Complainant is that after booking a hotel room with Opposite Party No.2, on the website of Opposite Party No.1, he did not get the room, immediately, after reaching the hotel. According to the Complainant, there was a delay of around 04 hrs. in allotment of the room by Opposite Party No.2.
9.         We have perused Annexure C-2, appended by the Complainant, which is a reservation slip, showing the reservation history on the website of Opposite Party No.1. On this reservation slip, the booking date is shown as 05.02.2018 at 11.35 A.M. IST; whereas, the reservation confirmation date is shown as 05.02.2018 at 10.49 P.M. IST. Hence, per this document, the room could not have been allotted by Opposite Party No.2 to the Complainant before this confirmation time i.e. 10.49 P.M. IST. Thus, we are of the concerted view that there was a definite delay of around 02 hrs. in allotment of the room to the Complainant by Opposite Party No.2 and the Complainant was made to wait high & dry in the waiting hall. It is, thus, legitimately proved that it was Opposite Party No.1 alone who is liable for deficiency in service qua the Complainant, in as much as, Opposite Party No.1 failed to confirm the booking to the Opposite Party No.2, well in advance. It is important to mention that in the present internet era, the confirmation should have been made instantaneously when the booking was done by the Complainant on the website of Opposite Party No.1.
10.         In the light of above discussion, this consumer complaint deserves to succeed. The same is accordingly partly allowed.  Opposite Party No.1 is directed as under :-

(i)     To pay Rs.7,500/- as compensation to the complainant for the unfair trade practice and harassment caused to him.

(ii)    To also pay a sum of Rs.7,500/- to the complainant as litigation expenses. 

                The complaint against Opposite Party No.2 fails and is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. 

11.         This order shall be complied with by Opposite Party No.1 within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall be liable to pay interest @12% p.a. on the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(i) from the date of filing the complaint till its realization, besides paying litigation expenses mentioned at Sr. No.(ii) above.
12.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
01/05/2019	[Dr.S.K.Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rattan Singh Thakur]
	Member	Member	President
“Dutt”