Haryana

Karnal

CC/27/2017

Reena Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Goibibo.Com - Opp.Party(s)

Anuj Gupta

13 Nov 2018

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.27 of 2017

                                                         Date of instt. 20.01.2017

                                                         Date of decision:13.11.2018

 

Reena Gupta, age 37 years, wife of Shri Aman Gupta, resident of shop no.64, first floor, New Grain Market, Gharaunda, District Karnal.

                                                                …….Complainant

                                        Versus

 

1. Goibibo.com, 5^th floor, Good Earth City Centre, Sector 50, Gurugram (Haryana) through its C.E.O.

2. Hotel Palbheu, Tibet Road, Gangtok (Sikkim), through its Manager/owner.

 

                                                                    …..Opposite Parties.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.    

 

Before:   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.      

      Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

              Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…….Member

 

 Present: Shri Anuj Gupta Advocate for complainant.

               Shri Mandeep Chauhan Advocate for OP no.1

               OP no.2 exparte.

                       

                (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 on the averments that complainant planned tour for Sikkim with her family in the month of May and for this purpose she contacted the OP no.1 for booking of room for 2 adults and one minor child in some Hotel at Gangtok (Sikkim) for three days. OP no.1 allured the complainant that the hotel of OP no.2 is a renowned hotel in Gangtok which is providing excellent facilities to their customers. On the assurance of OP no.1 the complainant got booked the standard room for May, 31 to June 3^rd of 2016 and payment was also made to OP no.1. The complainant intimated the OPs that the complainant alongwith his family would reach at the hotel in late hours i.e. up9/9.30 p.m. because of their long journey and it was also requested that everything should be kept in good manner because their minor son was also with them. On 31 May, 2016 when complainant alongwith her family reached the hotel of OP no.2 after a long journey, they were very surprised to see the worst condition of the room at the hotel because this was not the category of room so booked by the complainant through OP no.1. The room was very smelly and two floors down in the basement and was very congested and dirty. In fact the room was store room and full of seepage and used by the employees of the hotel. The complainant made a complaint to the Manager of OP no.2 in this regard but he deal with the complainant in very rude manner and also flatly asked the complainant that she may have option to cancel the bookings because it is fault of the OP no.1. Thereafter, complainant made several calls to the OP no.1 on their phone on which OP no.1 assured to clear the problems but all in vain and complainant was left with no other way after waiting three hours in the night but to stay in the abovesaid worst conditioned room due to which family of the complainant including her minor son suffered great hardship, mental as well as physical harassment in cold night in unknown city. In this way there was great deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs. OP no.1 appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections regarding the concealment of true and material facts and territorial jurisdiction. On merits, it is pleaded that OP no.1 is only an e-commerce and an online platform wherein various Hoteliers have listed their hotels for promotion and bookings through the website of OP no.1.However, OP no.1 is only a facilitator providing an online platform and OP no.1 is not liable for the quality, conditions and representations made by the Hotelier. It is further pleaded that the complainant had voluntarily visited the website owned and maintained by OP no.1 and after being satisfied with the hotel ratings, price and review booked a room at “Hotel Palbheu, Gangtok” for one day i.e. check in on 31.5.2016 and check out on 1.6.2016. It is further pleaded that the complainant booked another room on 16.5.2016 at 12.45 p.m. for one day i.e. check in on 1.6.2016 and check out on 2.6.2016 in the name of Mr. Aman Gupta. The complainant once again booked another room on the same day i.e. on 16.5.2016 at 12.51 p.m. for one day i.e. check in on 2.6.2016 and check out on 3.6.2016 in the name of Mr. Aman Gupta.  It is further pleaded that the complainant herself chose the hotel and has already availed the service thus she is not entitled for any refund from the OP no.1. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP no.1 and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             OP no.2 did not appear and proceeded against exparte by the order of this Forum dated 6.3.2017.

4.             Complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C7 and closed her evidence on 1.5.2018.

5.             On the other hand, OP no.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Ankita Mishra Ex.O1 and documents Ex.O2 and Ex.O3 and closed the evidence on 23.10.2018.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             The counsel for complainant argued that the complainant got booked the Standard room at hotel at Gangtok, Sikkim for May 31 to June 3 online and made payment to OP no.1. The complainant alongwith his family reached the booked hotel and he was surprised to see the worst condition of the room at the hotel as same was not the category of the room as booked by the complainant. The room was very smelly and two floors down in the basement. In fact the room was a store room and full of seepage and used by the employee of the hotel. The complainant made a complaint to the OP, but the OP did not listen the complaint. The complainant and his family was mentally harassed by the OP and prayed for allow the complaint.

7.             The counsel of the OP no.1 argued that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and neither the office of any OPs is situated at Karnal nor any payment was made at Karnal and no cause of action either in part or whole was arise at Karnal. The OP no.1 is only a facilitator providing an online platform and OP no.1 is not liable to quality, condition and representations made by the hotelier and prayed for dismiss the complaint qua OP no.1.

8.             Admittedly, the complainant booked the hotel of OP no.2 online through OP no.1. The allegations levied by the complainant are not rebutted by the OP no.2 because OP no.2 did not appear and opted to be proceeded against exparte. Hence the evidence produced by the complainant is unchallenged and unrebutted so there is no reason to disbelieve the said allegations i.e. condition of the rooms. Thus, we are of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP no.2.

9.             Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussions, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP no.2 to refund the amount to the complainant paid by her for hotel room booked with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of payment of amount and till the date of realization. We further direct the OP no.2 to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:13.11.2018

                                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

               

        (Vineet Kaushik)                (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

            Member                               Member