BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Complaint Case no. 612 of 2022
Date of Institution: 04.10.2022
Date of Decision: 08.09.2023.
Ramesh Sharma aged about 57 years son of Sh. Gurra Ditta Sharma, resident of 631/10, Aggarsain Colony, Near Vikas Bharati School, Sirsa.
………Complainant.
Versus
1. Gurpreet SinghBajwa Owner of Ceara Resort, VPO Sikanderpur 7th KM. Milestone, Hisar Road, Mobile No. 99968-52359.
2. Ceara Resort, VPO Sikanderpur, 7th Km. Milestone, Hisar Road through its Manager Jaivir Mobile No. 90504-23272.
……… Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR………. PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……………..MEMBER
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Parvinder Gaba, Advocate for complainant.
Opposite parties already exparte.
ORDER:-
In brief, the case of complainant is that in the month of February, 2020 complainant had planned marriage of her elder daughter Shaweta with with Sh. Rohit son of Sh. Vijender Joshi, resident of Dabwali which was fixed for 26/27 March, 2020. That on 03.03.2020 complainant had booked resort of the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as ops) for marriage function of his daughter for the night of 27th March, 2020. The complainant had paid an advance amount of Rs.50,000/- to the ops towards total amount of Rs.2,50,000/- It is further averred that since COVID pandemic had started in all over world including India and lockdown had been imposed in many countries, so the ops were also orally agreed that if the function of marriage ceremony cannot be held in resort due to said pandemic in that case ops will refund/ return all advances to the complainant. That the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India announced a Janta Curfew from 7.00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m. on 22th of March, 2020 and on the evening of 24th of March, 2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs vide order no. 40-3/2020 D dated 24.03.2020 ordered a nationwide lockdown for 21 days, limiting movement of the entire population of India as a preventive measure against the COVID-19 pandemic in India and as per guidelines all social, political, sports, entertainment, academic, cultural, religious functions and gathering shall be barred and as such marriage function could not be conducted due to lockdown in force from 25th of March to 14th of April. The complainant was forced to cancel the booking of ops’ resort for marriage function of his daughter. It is further averred that complainant had informed the ops about cancellation of program and ops agreed to refund the entire advance amount as was being done in all similar cases by all the resort owners. That complainant had demanded the above said amount of Rs.50,000/- from ops many a times through telephonic message as well as through personal message but ops have always been delaying the same on one pretext or the other and till date even a single penny has not been returned by ops to the complainant. It is further averred that on 22.08.2022 the complainant got issued a legal notice upon ops requesting them to refund the above said amount of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of legal notice but to no effect and ops have committed gross deficiency in service towards complainant and have caused unnecessary harassment and mental agony to him. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to the ops which received back with the report of “Chaspangi” but however none appeared on behalf ops. As such ops were proceeded against exparte.
3. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and copies of documents i.e. wedding card Ex.C1, receipt of the amount of Rs.40,000/- with advance amount of Rs.10,000/- as Ex.C2, legal notice Ex.C3, postal receipts Ex.C4 and Ex.C5, aadhar card Ex.C6, order dated 22.03.2020 of the Government of India Ex.C7, order daged 24.03.2020 of the Government of India Ex.C8, letter and order of the Haryana Government Ex.C9, Ex.C10, guidelines regarding containment of COVID-19 Ex.C11, order dated 29.3.2020 of Government of India Ex.C12 and letter dated 29.3.2020 of Haryana Government Ex.C13.
4. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. Learned counsel for complainant has contended that he had paid an advance amount of Rs.50,000/- towards the total consideration of Rs.2,50,000/- to the op for performance of marriage of her daughter in the Marriage Palace of op but marriage could not be solemnized due to lockdown on the direction and notification issued by Government of India for containment of Corona Virus disease i.e. COVID-19 and prayed for refund of the amount deposited by complainant with the op.
6. We have duly considered the contention of learned counsel for complainant. The agreement of performance of marriage in the Marriage Palace of ops could not be performed due to policy of the Government and instructions of the Govt. of India due to imposition of lockdown for containment of COVID-19. A contract after formation will be held frustrated if, performance was feasible or legal at the time of entry, but after entering because of some Legislative or executive intervention the contract has become insolvable or unlawful. Since opposite parties could not perform their part and marriage could not be solemnized due to Government or Legislative or executive intervention, Section 56 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 comes into play and agreement between the parties has become void which cannot be enforced by either of the parties. Since instruction has been issued by the Government and there was complete lockdown and marriage could not be performed in the Marriage Palace of ops, therefore, complainant is not entitled to get enforced agreement and complainant is not entitled for refund of any amount as ops have also suffered loss of remaining amount of Rs. two lacs for non performance of marriage in their marriage palace. In the eventuality of instructions issued by Haryana Government and Government of India, marriage could not be performed in the marriage palace of ops and both the parties cannot claim enforcement of the agreement which has become void due to Govt./ legislative and executive intervention. Therefore, present complaint is not maintainable at all and is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 08.09.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
